[求助]LSAT-5-2-16

G-CRACKER

欧觉得红色和绿色的部分并不是 “but”的关系，而是“further” 递进的或是因果“so”。。。就因为这个but, 欧糊涂了，选错了，答案是C.

16. It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby. If this claim could be made with certainty, there would be no reason for not locating sites in areas of dense population. But the policy of dumping nuclear waste only in the more sparsely populated regions indicates, at the very least, some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument?

(A) Evaluation plans in the event of an accident could not be guaranteed to work perfectly except where the population is small.

(B) In the event of an accident, it is certain that fewer people would be harmed in a sparsely populated than in s densely populated area.

(C) Dumping of nuclear waste poses fewer economic and bureaucratic problems in sparsely populated than in densely populated areas.

(D) There are dangers associated with chemical waste, and it, too, is dumped away from areas of dense population.

(E) Until there is no shred of doubt that nuclear dumps are safe, it makes sense to situate them where they pose the least threat to the public.

lawyer_1

红色部分用虚拟语气，说假如那个CLAIM是确定，则核废料该放在areas of dense population。绿色部分一转，说政策不是这麽要求。政策要求的却相反，政策要求在sparsely populated 区。所以BUT此处是转择没错。C是别的原因导致核废料放在sparsely populated 区，不是安全担忧。

G-CRACKER

大律师，这么一说，欧清楚很多，多谢！

Bensontuo

G-CRACKER 发表于 2004-10-17 01:27
欧觉得红色和绿色的部分并不是 “but”的关系，而是“further” 递进的或是因果“so”。。。就因为这个but, ...

Spot the question type: Necessary Assumption -> Weaken

Core of the argument:

If dumping nuclear waste ---> it must be in the more sparsely populated region ---> Some misgiving about safety on the part of those responsible for policy.

What if there are the other reasons why it has to be in the sparsely populated region ?