求助帖~GWD1-Q18

lainemai

It is illegal to advertise prescriptionmedications in Hedland except in professional medical journals or by maildirectly to physicians.  A proposed lawwould allow general advertising of prescription medications.  Opponents object that, in general, laypersonslack the specialized knowledge to evaluate such advertisements and might asktheir physicians for inappropriate medications. But since physicians have the final say as to whether to prescribe amedication for a patient, the objection provides no grounds for concern.

Which of the following would it be mostuseful to establish in order to evaluate the argument?[W1]

A.      Whether nonprescription medications caninteract with and block the action of any prescription medications that couldbe advertised to the general public

B.      Whether most prescription medicationadvertisements directed at the general public would be advertisements forrecently developed medications newly available by prescription

C.      Whether prescription medicationadvertisements directed at the general public would appear on television andradio as well as in print

D.      Whether physicians are more likely topay attention to advertising directed to the general public than to advertisingdirected to physicians

E.       Whether physicians arelikely to succumb to pressure from patients to prescribe inappropriatemedications

---

评价题的选项只有一个是和原文相关的；文中的结论是因为药师有最后开药的生杀大权,所以反对无效；选项中必然包含这样概念的句子啊。

这道题纠结了好久，本来很想选E的，但是最后觉得不对就选了D，先不说D的对与错，我来说一下为什么不选E，因为文章说了一句话：[size=12.800000190734863px]Opponents object that, in general, laypersons lack the specialized knowledge to evaluate such advertisements and might ask their physicians for inappropriate medications

那么文章已经说了patients可能会让医生开一些不适当的药，那么意思不就和E是一样的吗？那么E不就是在重复吗？求大牛解释~谢谢~~

阿ceng

【最近也在做GWD的题目，一起来讨论一下吧，我也不知道这样分析对不对】


It is illegal to advertise prescription medications in Hedland except in professional medical journals or by mail directly to physicians.  A proposed law would allow general advertising of prescription medications.  Opponents object that, in general, laypersons lack the specialized knowledge to evaluate such advertisements and might ask their physicians for inappropriate medications.  But since physicians have the final say as to whether to prescribe a medication for a patient, the objection provides no grounds for concern.
【
一开始会觉得是个方案推理，但是后面却开始对方案进行评估，有反对者也有支持者。
经过分析，这个或许是“因果推理”模式：
Physician have the final say（因）  NOT inappropriate medications + law是没问题的（果）
所以有两个CQ
CQ1: 因果概括问题
CQ2: 干扰因素问题
所以，这一类题目，要在答案里涉及到“因”。

】
Which of the following would it be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the argument?
A.        Whether nonprescription medications can interact with and block the action of any prescription medications that could be advertised to the general public  （和nonprescription没关系呀，我们现在是在讨论prescription medication做广告是否有害）
B.        Whether most prescription medication advertisements directed at the general public would be advertisements for recently developed medications newly available by prescription （没有涉及到physicians，不涉及到“因”的特点就是不对的。）
C.        Whether prescription medication advertisements directed at the general public would appear on television and radio as well as in print （这是没有关系的，和通过何种途径传播无关）
D.        Whether physicians are more likely to pay attention to advertising directed to the general public than to advertising directed to physicians （这个选项也是不对的，physicians做广告？没这回事，physicians不做广告，这家伙只负责开药）
E.        Whether physicians are likely to succumb to pressure from patients to prescribe inappropriate medications （这是对CQ1：因果概括问题，顺着“因”的思路进一步解释。但evaluate the argument这一类题目是同时具有加强和削弱性质的。所以可以把whether去掉，只要符合加强or削弱其中一项就可以了。{这道题，用whether，我们可以这样分析=如果physicians屈服于病人给予的压力然后给了不恰当的药，那么这个law就是有问题的；如果physicians不屈服于病人给予的压力合理开药，那么作为最后一个把关者，physicians就是尽职的，所以呢law就没问题}）

lainemai

阿ceng 发表于 2014-10-22 15:55
【最近也在做GWD的题目，一起来讨论一下吧，我也不知道这样分析对不对】

但是原文本来就显示了这样一种可能性。放在选项里重复了一次也没有问题吗？我知道选项只有这个最好最靠谱，但是不知道这样重复在EVALUATE THE ARGUMENT这样的问题里也是可以的吗？

阿ceng

恩恩，我是根据helr的方法去推，在他看来如果类型分清楚之后，有些答案反而要涉及到原文内容才好的。【我在尝试ing，还望多多指教】

lainemai

阿ceng 发表于 2014-10-22 17:29
恩恩，我是根据helr的方法去推，在他看来如果类型分清楚之后，有些答案反而要涉及到原文内容才好的。【我在 ...

恩恩这个我有的....

lainemai

阿ceng 发表于 2014-10-22 17:29
恩恩，我是根据helr的方法去推，在他看来如果类型分清楚之后，有些答案反而要涉及到原文内容才好的。【我在 ...

其实感觉它的这份笔记感觉太过宏观，GMAT里很多逻辑题都超越了他所说的思路范围的赶脚....难道我读的方法不对么......

cchen.chicago

lainemai 发表于 2014-10-22 19:10
其实感觉它的这份笔记感觉太过宏观，GMAT里很多逻辑题都超越了他所说的思路范围的赶脚....难道我读的方法 ...

Might ask... for... 病人要，医生可以不开处方。医生也可以迫于压力开不太想开的处方。It is really up to physician

lainemai

cchen.chicago 发表于 2014-10-23 08:32
Might ask... for... 病人要，医生可以不开处方。医生也可以迫于压力开不太想开的处方。It is really up  ...

enen谢谢~