大全-8-12

tinajanuary

12. When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, “No.” Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies. Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?

(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, “Yes”?

(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?

(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist’s suggestion that they are deaf?

(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?

(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?

why answer is a)??

berylgirls

既然两部分是SAPERATE，即没有任何关系，REPLIES部分的回答就是自由的，可说YES，也可说NO。但原文的被实验者subjects都回答NO，说明REPLIES部分不是自由的，和DEAF部分有关系。WEAKEN原文

nyc_cfas

A: theorists的解释说the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts，那么被催眠的人的所有器官都成为孤立的，没有任何内在的联系。聋的部份(耳朵)，回答的部份(嘴)。。。如果是这样，嘴的回答就应该是随机的，则应有时回答“Yes”。而实验证明嘴每次都回答的是“No.” ，这说明在the part that is deaf 和the part that replies间必然有一种内在的联系。(A)对theorists的解释提出了很好的质疑，从而起到削弱的作用。迷惑选项(D)，但(D) 中hypnotized subjects没有(A) 中the part that replies更切题。(A) 最佳

rheazhang

D提出的题目本身不包括的statement，感觉是无关选项。

逻辑区的讨论怎么这么少啊，还是我没找对地方？很多题目都没有讨论？