请教LSAT-0210-4-21

lonelywalker123

21.   olitical scientist: As a political system, democracy does not promote political freedom. There are historical examples of democracies that ultimately resulted in some of the most oppressive societies. Likewise, there have been enlightened despotisms and oligarchies that have provided a remarkable level of political freedom to their subjects.

The reasoning in the political scientist’s argument is flawed because it

       (A) confuses the conditions necessary for political freedom with the conditions sufficient to bring it about

       (B) fail to consider that a substantial increase in the level of political freedom might cause a society to become more democratic

       (C) appeals to historical examples that are irrelevant to the causal claim being made

       (D) overlooks the possibility that democracy promotes political freedom without being necessary or sufficient by itself to produce it

       (E) bases its historical case on a personal point of view

答案为D，不太明白！D的意思是说“忽视了民主促进政治自由的必要或充分性吗？”请问A有什么错误，我理解其意思为“混淆了政治自由的必要条件与充分条件”？

还有第17题

17.   Mullen has proposed to raise taxes on the rich, who made so much money during the past decade. Yet Mullen’s tax records show heavy investment in business during that time and large profits; so Mullen’s proposal does not deserve our consideration.

The flawed reasoning in the argument above is most similar to the flawed reasoning in which one of the following?

       (A) Do not vote for Smith’s proposed legislation to subsidize child care for working parents; Smith is a working parent.

        (B) Do not put any credence in Dr. Han’s recent proposal to ban smoking in all public places; Dr. Han is a heavy smoker.

         答案是B，同意地说！但请问A错在那里，似乎也是同样的推理过程！

chelseayang

Question 21:

D means "忽视了一种可能性, 即民主ye可以在不为自由产生的充分或必要条件的情况下促进政治自由, "

A is not accuarate.  "democracy does not promote political freedom" itself does not involve the issue of "necessary" or "sufficient" condition.

chelseayang

Question 17:

The flaw of the argument is : attack Mullen's proposal by attacking Mullen's tax record (the source), without considering the proposal itself. As far, both (A) and (B) are merit choices.

However, we need further analysis on the stimulus. Look at the "direction" of the stimulus. Let's paraphrase it this way: Mullen proposes tax increase on the rich, which is incredible, beause he is rich" (i smell "suicide" !)

A) "Smith proposed to subsidy childcare. Don't believe him, because he is a working parent."(for his own sake)

B)"Dr. Dan proposed to ban smoking. Don't trust him, because he is a smoker"("suicide")

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-30 11:13:51编辑过]

Bensontuo

lonelywalker123 发表于 2004-11-28 16:36
21.  &nbspolitical scientist: As a political system, democracy does not promote political fre ...

21

Spot the question type: method of reasoning - flaw

core of the argument :

" some " of democracies ---> " some " of the most oppressive societies

" some " of despotisms and oligarchies ---> political freedom

1. " some " of democracies is not representable enough for all of the democracies, so, some of the most oppressive societies is not necessary condition for it.

2. " some " of oligarchies are also not representable enough for all of the aristocracies, so it is also not necessary enough to lead to political freedom.

3. based on the conclusion, D ---> no promote political freedom ( Promote political Freedom ---> No D )

and also the above 2 premises, we know that promoting political freedom is also not sufficient enough to lead to " no democracy )


answers:

A. Interesting, but no, it is neither sufficient nor necessary.

B. non relevant

C. no

D. Correct answer.

E. no

Bensontuo

lonelywalker123 发表于 2004-11-28 16:36
21.  &nbspolitical scientist: As a political system, democracy does not promote political fre ...

17.

the reason why A is wrong is because based on the original argument, M does not intend to benefit himself, it is actually the opposite.