大家分析分析这道

wxd5118

Critic: Film attendance is at an all time low. Attendance peaked in the mid-1940's, when producers made films that were much less violent than are films made today. Clearly, the public is showing its disapproval of today's more violent films by simply resfusing to view them.
Each of following, if true, weakens the critic's argument EXPECT:
1.of the 50 films made last year that had the lowest attendance, almost all had  little or no violence.
2.screenings of films made decades ago attract more viewers than do screenings of current films.
3.when rentals of videotape films are counted, violent films are attracting many more paying viewers than they did in earlier years.
4.the price of a film ticket, after adjusting for inflation, is significantly higher now than it was in the mid-1940's.
5.violent films shown on television have consistently attracted large audiences ever since such films became available on television.

大家先分析分析答案。

tocean0222

I choose 4 since only 4 descibe a fact taht is irrelevent to the argument, whereas every other choices  give an explanation to the decrease of today's film attendance.

dl7801

2.
chioce 2 actually supports the conclusion somewhat.

wxd5118

Would you please explain why choice 2 functions to support argument?

dl7801

conclusion:  the public is showing its disapproval of today's more violent films by simply resfusing to view them.
evidence: 1)Film attendance is at an all time low, while attendance was peaked in the mid-1940's.
2)producers made films that were much less violent in the mid-1940's than are films made today.

Chioce 2, which states that more attendence are attracted when showing old films than when showing current films, indicates that people like more of old films ( films made decades) than today films that are much more violent.
Although chioce 2 doesn't mention the reason why more attendence are attracted by  old films, it provides additional evidence for the conclusion as well as supports the evidence 1.

lyricling

同意 dl7801  ，这道题偶错了。
看来还需要大练特练逻辑呀。

joywzy

i choose choice 2.

But i think choice 2 is irrevelant .

In this argument the conclusion is  high violent, low attendance. But in choice 2 only mention screening of the film instead of being violent in the argument .So i regard choice 2 as irrevelant , not as weakening.

[此贴子已经被作者于2003-6-21 20:46:28编辑过]

invisiblewy

agree with joywzy.

choice 2, simply irrelevent.

dl7801

"In this argument the conclusion is  low violent, low ."

should be" high violent, low attendance " .

"But in choice 2 only mention screening of the film instead of being violent in the argument"

choice 2  compares attendance of showing films made decades ago with that of showing films made today.  Do the films made in the mid-1940's belong to films made decades ago?

  

braveMBA

同意JOYWZY，就是无关。这好象是GRE的单题。