有关大象的逻辑题

邓邓邓111

Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?

The expansion of large-scale farming in Africa and Asia has destroyed much of the natural vegetation on which elephants have historically depended, forcing them to turn to cultivated land to satisfy their enormous appetites. As a result, farmers have lost millions of dollars worth of crops annually. Yet even if elephant sanctuaries were created on a widespread basis to guarantee elephants sufficient natural vegetation, the raiding would likely persist, since



A
when elephants forage for food, they typically travel in herds.  分析A选项


B
Foraging elephants have been known to cause substantial damage even to plants that they do not eat.  分析B选项


C
Some of the land where crops have suffered extensive damage from elephants has been allowed to return to its natural state.  分析C选项


D
Elephants tend to prefer cultivated crops to wild vegetation as a food source.  分析D选项


E
Elephant sanctuaries are usually created in areas that are rich in the natural vegetation on which elephants have historically depended.  分析E选项


为什么B 不对

wjtwenzi

这个题的逻辑其实挺好理解的：
农业扩张导致大象以前吃的食物被破坏→大象转向吃耕种的农作物→农民受损严重→即使开辟保护区提供充足的食物→大象袭击（吃）农场的现象仍然会持续。
很明显要解释最后的结论，需要说明为什么有了充足的食物大象还去农场，看选项。
A，和要解决的问题无关。不能说大象是群体活动的所以就去吃农场了。
B，和要解决的问题无关。大象会破坏他们不吃的食物，如果B成立的话那农场很早以前就应该被破坏了。
C，完全无关的选项。被破坏的土地会放任不管，无法解释大象为何还吃农场的作物。
D，解释了其中一种可能。即大象吃过耕作的作物之后爱上了这种食物，就不会去吃以前吃的食物了。这也就解释了即使开辟了保护区提供充足的野生作物，大象还是会跑去农场吃耕作的食物。
E，部分削弱了结论。开辟的保护区有丰富的（大象以前吃的）食物。不仅没有解释问题，反而让问题更加扑朔迷离。