返回列表 发帖

求教: OG12-CR-87

87.IntheUnitedStates,ofthepeoplewhomovedfromonestatetoanotherwhentheyretired,thepercentage
whoretiredtoFloridahasdecreasedbythreepercentagepointsoverthepasttenyears.Sincemany
local
businessesinFloridacatertoretirees,thesedeclinesarelikelytohaveanoticeablynegativeeconomic
effect
onthesebusinessesandthereforeontheeconomyofFlorida.

Whichofthefollowing,iftrue,mostseriouslyweakenstheargumentgiven?

(A)Peoplewhomovedfromonestatetoanotherwhentheyretiredmovedagreaterdistance,onaverage,
lastyearthansuchpeopledidtenyearsago.

(B)PeopleweremorelikelytoretiretoNorthCarolinafromanotherstatelastyearthanpeoplewere
tenyearsago.


(C)Thenumberofpeoplewhomovedfromonestatetoanotherwhentheyretiredhasincreasedsignificantly
overthepasttenyears.

(D)ThenumberofpeoplewholeftFloridawhentheyretiredtoliveinanotherstatewasgreaterlastyearthan
itwastenyearsago.

(E)Floridaattractsmorepeoplewhomovefromonestatetoanotherwhentheyretirethandoesanyother
state.


Argument Evaluation
Situation    Of those people who move to another state when they retire, the percentage moving to
Florida has declined. This trend is apt to harm Florida's economy because many
businesses there cater to retirees.
Reasoning   Which of the options most weakens the argument?
'The argument draws its conclusion from
data about the proportion
of emigrating retirees moving to Florida. Yet what matters
more directly to the conclusion (and to Florida's economy) is the absolute number
of
retirees immigrating to Florida. That number could have remained constant or even risen
if the absolute numbers of emigrating retirees itself increased while the proportion going
to Florida decreased.

A   This has no obvious bearing on the argument one way or another. It makes it more likely,
perhaps, that a person in a distant state will retire to Florida, but less likely that one in a
neighboring state will do so.
B   This has no bearing whether fewer people have been retiring to Florida over the last ten years.
C    Correct. This is the option that most seriously weakens the argument.
D   This makes it more
likely that Florida's economy will be harmed because of decreasing numbers of
retirees, but has no real bearing on the argument which concludes specifically that
declines in the
proportion of emigrating retirees moving to Florida
will have a negative effect on the state's economy.
E   This is irrelevant. At issue is how the numbers of retirees in Florida from one year compare to the
next, not how those numbers compare with numbers of retirees in other states.
The correct answer is C.
为什么B选项就不对呢? OG的解释我也没看明白, 请大家帮忙看看,给予解惑~ 谢谢啦先! ^_^


收藏 分享

og的意思是比率虽然下降了,但绝对数量在增长

TOP

个人觉得应该是"时间"方面的问题。
B选项,说明的是去年与十年前的比较。
而本文argument说的是十年间的比较,“去年”无关。不知道这样理解对不对。

有些题还是挺考细的。不知道这样的题怎么保证2分钟以内搞定。

TOP

拜托,来个空格好不好.看第一句都累.原来是这题.
做逻辑的题目中,对数字,比率之间的比较要很敏感.比率增长不一定代表数字增加,反之也是这样.这可能是一个考点,养成习惯.看到比较提高警惕就好了.事先有预期也会在选答案的时候提高速度.

B说的是去年,无关选项

TOP

我知道答案排除下来只能选C,但我有个疑问..题目说的是Florida的情况,但C说的是整体的,整体的也不能代表地方的情况啊,我第一次做的时候就这样把C给排掉了。。

TOP

你说的很有道理,的确这里没有特指florida
我觉得可以这样考虑:
1、此题考查的就是对于比例和绝对数量之间的差别,而对结论进行削弱,所以我们重要看此方面的条件
2、我们也可以把C当作待考查选项去分析其他选项,从而得出C选项更合理

所以,我相信没有任何一句话是不存在逻辑漏洞的,只要我们能够找到最适合的就好!

TOP

嗯,比率的增长并不代表数字的增加,反过来数字的增长也不代表比率的增加,以后对此要多加注意呀~~

TOP

B不是说的是North Carolina吗?
我觉得是无关选项吧。。。

(也不知道NC和F什么关系,可能是我想错了。。。)

TOP

这里我真忍不住钻一下牛角尖啊,C说退休后搬家去其它地方的人数增多了,那么这个时候如果存在有一个地方居住人口增多,势必是由另一个地方的人口减少引起的!那么如果Florida恰好是人口减少的地方呢?
所以我觉得如果可以把这个条件看成weaken,那么它就因为同样的理由可以被认为是strengthen。
如果一个最巧合的情况,搬家的人数多了,但他们刚好相互弥补,那么每个地方的居民保持稳定,也不会构成weaken。
真是觉得C的问题也挺大啊~~~钻牛角尖了 --

TOP

我觉的逻辑里面有很多题目即使是正确选项也存在很多漏洞。但是之前不知道看谁的笔记觉得写得很对,gmat考察的是你做决定的能力,在现实生活中不一定永远有最正确的,但是永远有相对好的,你要有这个能力去决定谁是相对好的,尤其是当你坐上领导层以后。。。。。。

TOP

返回列表

站长推荐 关闭


美国top10 MBA VIP申请服务

自2003年开始提供 MBA 申请服务以来,保持着90% 以上的成功率,其中Top10 MBA服务成功率更是高达95%


查看