lsat-0110-1-15,lsat-0110-1-23,lsat-0210-1-14

robertchu

The survey question didn't impose a dilemma, it's simply asking for preference.  Therefore E is not relevant.

流沙

以下是引用robertchu在2004-9-12 14:02:00的发言：

The survey question didn't impose a dilemma, it's simply asking for preference.  Therefore E is not relevant.

我觉得它是一个dilema，这个问题问“你倾向于A还是B”，事实上完全可以回答“两个都不倾向的”。

lawyer_1

“谢谢！ 这题想了很久也没有绕出来，现在发现有些题目我在考试的时候是绝对绕不出来了”其实该题并不复杂，只要你不要想得太复杂。原文说到底就是为了说明这种SUREST WAY影响SURVIVE。从这里得出结论statisticians’ claim 是错的。它的前提是SUREST WAY影响SURVIVE是错的。即A。这是属于原文推理得出一个结果，结论又是另一个结果题型。

lawyer_1

15题。原文用两个证据：调查问的问题biased和选的sample没代表性去怀疑调查的结果 North Americans are more concerned about their personal finances than about politics。E的调查结果没比较，故怀疑不了原文的调查结果，即不能支持原文结论，故错。

流沙

以下是引用lawyer_1在2004-9-13 19:27:00的发言：
“谢谢！ 这题想了很久也没有绕出来，现在发现有些题目我在考试的时候是绝对绕不出来了”其实该题并不复杂，只要你不要想得太复杂。原文说到底就是为了说明这种SUREST WAY影响SURVIVE。从这里得出结论statisticians’ claim 是错的。它的前提是SUREST WAY影响SURVIVE是错的。即A。这是属于原文推理得出一个结果，结论又是另一个结果题型。

--  作者：lawyer_1
--  发布时间：2004-9-13 19:40:00

--  
15题。原文用两个证据：调查问的问题biased和选的sample没代表性去怀疑调查的结果 North Americans are more concerned about their personal finances than about politics。E的调查结果没比较，故怀疑不了原文的调查结果，即不能支持原文结论，故错。

谢谢lawyer_1!!! 看了support是要支持结论才行。上面一道题我确实想复杂了，好好消化先～～

lawyer_1

23题的推理类似：有人建议考好GMAT的SUREST WAY是一天泡5，6小时CD，但每天5，6个小时泡CD会使人馊一圈。所以这个建议是错的。它的假设是考好GMAT的SUREST WAY不能使人馊一圈。

从作用点来说，SUPPORT的正确选项可以作用在证据上，也可作用在结论上，但从效果上讲要在结论上，即最终是对结论起作用的。

流沙

以下是引用lawyer_1在2004-9-13 23:44:00的发言：

23题的推理类似：有人建议考好GMAT的SUREST WAY是一天泡5，6小时CD，但每天5，6个小时泡CD会使人馊一圈。所以这个建议是错的。它的假设是考好GMAT的SUREST WAY不能使人馊一圈。

从作用点来说，SUPPORT的正确选项可以作用在证据上，也可作用在结论上，但从效果上讲要在结论上，即最终是对结论起作用的。

谢谢！23题我再好好推敲一下。在gwd中也碰到类似推理的题目了。

Bensontuo

流沙 发表于 2004-9-11 12:54
15. Statistician: A financial magazine claimed that its survey of its subscribers showed that North  ...

15.

Spot the question type: Either weaken or non relevant.

Core of the argument:

Questioning the evidence supported by the M to conclude that the claim of M is wrong.

let's dive into the answer.

A. it does strengthen the argument by citing the other instances of the similar cases happened.

B. It does strengthen the argument by citing the evidence that most of the claims of that M are all disproved.

C. It does strengthen the argument by supporting the premises of statistician that " this question is clearly biased. "

D. It does strengthen the argument by supporting the premises of statistician that " the readers of M are a self -Selecting sample "

E. Why it does not support the argument ?

1. 你喜歡吃鹽酥雞, 珍珠奶茶, 還有炸魷魚, 不代表你比起吃鹽酥雞更喜愛喝珍珠奶茶。

2. 你也沒有提供吃鹽酥雞, 喝珍珠奶茶, 還有吃炸魷魚的喜愛比較, 跟原文的辯證的確無關



23.

很棒的題目, 此題考了四個概念

1. method of the reasoning

a.找出統計學家的結論, 支持

b.找出作者的結論, 支持

c.找出作者怎麼利用自己從支持論證到自己的結論的這個論證步驟去推翻統計學家的結論

2. Necessary assumption

a. 作者的必要假設為何

b. 作者的必要假設是否有證據支持

3. Weaken by Negating the necessary assumption

如果作者利用自己的論證過程推翻統計學家的結論, 那作者就是假設了統計學家的必要假設為錯, 那如果作者假設了統計學家的必要假設為錯的這件事情為真, 那作者必定認為自己的必要假設為真。

4. Abstract usage of the language.

抽象的語言藝術來把我們剛剛對題目的論證過程簡化。

Core of the argument:

Some statisticians: If the surest way is to increase the overall correctness of total set of one's beliefs , it must be true that if given adequate evidence against it, belief be rejected without changing the set.

However,

if statistician is correct, then it must be true that if one were presented with any evidence, one must have to either reject some beliefs or else unchange that belief.

And, if the statement above is true, the it also must be true that one could have only have fewer and fewer belief.

So !!!

If we can survive, it must be true that we need many believes, and if true that, then it must be true that S's claim must be mistaken.


1. What is the necessary assumption of the author ?

" many believes is just one necessary condition of being able to survive; however, based on the argument of the author, If the surest way is to increase the overall correctness of total set of one's beliefs, then people must not be able to survive, and if author is correct, then S's claim must be wrong. In that sense, the necessary assumption of the author is - If the surest way is to increase the overall correctness of total set of one's beliefs,  it must not have one " not being able to survive " .  重點來了, 作者並沒有提供任何證據, 理由, 原因來支持為什麼自己的必要假設為真, 作者是用自己的必要假設來反駁統計學家的結論。但是, 必要假設也是假設的一種, 所以, 作者定為利用自己的預前假設來推翻統計學家的結論。

let us dive into the answers

A. Perfect answer.

B. 作者並沒有忽視到一個人的beliefs 是否會增加的機率, 作者的結論為, 統計學家必定為錯, 因為按照統計學家的論證結果, 人不能生存, 所以, 作者必定是假設了, 如果作者推理為真的這件事情的存在為真, 其必定不能阻擋人的生存。

C. 這題沒有任何比較的概念, 也沒有任何證據支持

D. 不對, 作者是take for granted that the surest way to increase the beliefs must not hinder one's survival.

E. 不對, 作者是tale for granted that statistician must take for granted one's survival must be hindered if the surest way to increase one's beliefs must decrease the beliefs.


14.

Spot the question type: Necessary Assumption

Core of the argument:

% of British travel 30 years ago is smaller than % of British travel + Travel is expensive, so it must be true that British people must have more money to spend on vacations now than they did 30 years ago.

所以作者的必要假設為, 錢的多寡必定是造成英國人旅遊在三十年間比例多寡的核心因素。

let us dive into the options

A. Negate -> If foreign travel had been less expensive 30 years ago, British people would have enough money to take vacation abroad - 反而支持原文了, 不是正確答案。

B. Negate -> If travel to Britain were less expensive, no more people of other countries would travel to Britain - 我們在講英國人去國外旅行, 不是其他國家的人去英國旅行, out of the scope.

C. Negate -> If the percentage of British people vacationing abroad was lower 30 years ago, then the British people of 30 years ago must " not " have spent more money on domestic vacations - 我們在講出國旅行, 不是講在國內旅行, out of the scope.

D. Negate -> If more of the British people 30 years ago had had enough money to vacation, Not more would have done so - 成功推翻了, 作者的必要假設在於, 錢的多寡影響了比例的多寡, 可是取非後的這個選項告訴你, 錢的多寡不會影響到比例的多寡, 正確答案。

E. 我不覺得有人會選這個答案, 甚是白痴。