ChaseDream GMATPrep08逻辑笔记,如何区别因果还是方案？

raining3023

如题，在实际做题中总是不会区分因果还是方案。如OG13的16题，
In Washington County, attendance at the movies is just large enough for the cinema operators to make modest
profits. The size ofthe county's population is stable and is notexpected to increase much. Yet there are
investors ready to double the number of movie screens in the county within five years, andthey are predicting
solid profits both for themselves and for the established cinema operators.
Which of the following, if true about Washington County, most helps to provide a justification for the investors'
prediction?
(A) Over the next ten years, people in their teenage years, the prime moviegoing age, will be a rapidly growing
proportion of the county's population.
(B) As distinct from the existing cinemas, most of the cinemas being planned would be located in downtown
areas, in hopes of stimulating an economic revitalization of those areas.
(C) Spending on video purchases, as well as spending on video rentals, has been increasing modestly each
year for the past ten years.
(D) The average number of screens per cinema is lower among existing cinemas than it is among cinemas still
in the planning stages.
(E) The sale of snacks and drinks in cinemas accounts for a steadily growing share of most cinema operators'
profits.
我的理解是方案推理，目标是solid profits, 方案是double the number of movie screens in the county within five years, 找选项，所提到的内容与评价方案有关。只有选项D提到了the number of movie screens ，但是看具体内容并没有评价，不是答案。那该怎么分析呢？

zxppx

同学，我刚开始做CR的时候也是和你一样，喜欢找跟问题有关的选项，然后就认为这样的选项是对的。但是GMAT通常不会出这种纯属技巧的题目，相反它可能正好利用这一点来误导我们。我还是建议你在理解了题干的基础之上，再看选项。刚开始会很慢，每道题花的时间会比较长，但是你这样仔细分析之后，就会获得真正的提高！

raining3023

zxppx 发表于 2013-6-15 20:15
同学，我刚开始做CR的时候也是和你一样，喜欢找跟问题有关的选项，然后就认为这样的选项是对的。但是GMAT通 ...

谢谢你的回复
其实这道题不用任何方法，只是看懂意思我是可以选对的。但我觉得不从逻辑的角度真正理解推理过程是不扎实的，所以我想从理论的角度找出答案，然后反而找不到了

zxppx

这道题的discrepancy在于，虽然人口数量不变----但是通过增加一倍的screens数量，能够使得利润增加（both established cinema operators and investors）。D确实提到了the number of movie screens，但是能说明利润增加吗？不能。而A选项提供了一个思路，就是虽然总人口不变，但是随着时间的改变，各个年龄段的人数是会改变的。比如以前20岁至25岁的人占20%，但是经过了5年后，这个年龄段的人可能就达到50%了，那么观看电影的人数就会增加，所以利润能够增加。

erintan06

我觉得是因果。
首先题目的结论是：the investor prediction,即predicting solid profits both for themselves and for the established cinema operators。
推出：
前提（因）是：电影院的入座率刚好能够盈利，而且小镇的人口不会大幅增加。
结论（果）：double the number of movie screens 是不能带来solid profits的。

因为题干有YET做转折，所以推理方向是：削弱

方案和因果的推理不同在于：方案的推理只是纯粹给出方案但是不会论证方案，但是因果会。（这个可以看逻辑笔记，那里有)

raining3023

erintan06 发表于 2013-6-16 17:14
我觉得是因果。
首先题目的结论是：the investor prediction,即predicting solid profits both for themsel ...

从有没有论证的角度去区别我觉得有点模糊，比如逻辑笔记的75题
75.​

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the reasoning in the passage?

Kernland’s government restricts the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure a low-cost supply for domestic processing plants.  Though the policy constrains farm income and limits the number of farmers who can profitably grow cashews, the government defends it on the grounds that, since the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the restrictions would hurt efforts to reduce urban unemployment.  However, the policy may actually have contributed to urban unemployment, since __________.
我觉得Though the policy constrains farm income and limits the number of farmers who can profitably grow cashews, the government defends it on the grounds that, since the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the restrictions would hurt efforts to reduce urban unemployment. 这里都是在论证方案的
回到OG那题，yet确实是个不错的点来确认是因果推理，谢谢你的解释

raining3023

erintan06 发表于 2013-6-16 17:14
我觉得是因果。
首先题目的结论是：the investor prediction,即predicting solid profits both for themsel ...

从有没有论证的角度去区别我觉得有点模糊，比如逻辑笔记的75题
75.​

Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the reasoning in the passage?

Kernland’s government restricts the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure a low-cost supply for domestic processing plants.  Though the policy constrains farm income and limits the number of farmers who can profitably grow cashews, the government defends it on the grounds that, since the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the restrictions would hurt efforts to reduce urban unemployment.  However, the policy may actually have contributed to urban unemployment, since __________.
我觉得Though the policy constrains farm income and limits the number of farmers who can profitably grow cashews, the government defends it on the grounds that, since the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the restrictions would hurt efforts to reduce urban unemployment. 这里都是在论证方案的

回到OG那题，yet确实是个不错的点来确认是因果推理，谢谢你的解释