: Goronian lawmaker: Goronia’s Cheese Importation Board, the agency responsible for inspecting all wholesale shipments of cheese entering Goronia from abroad and rejecting shipments that fail to meet specified standards, rejects about one percent of the cheese that it inspects. Since the health consequences and associated costs of not rejecting that one percent would be negligible, whereas the cost of maintaining the agency is not, the agency’s cost clearly outweighs the benefits it provides.

Knowing the answer to which of the following would be most useful in evaluating the lawmaker’s argument?

A: Are any of the types of cheeses that are imported into Goronia also produced in Goronia?

B: Has the Cheese Importation Board, over the last several years, reduced its operating costs by eliminating inefficiencies within the agency itself?

C: Does the possibility of having merchandise rejected by the Cheese Importation Board deter many cheese exporters from shipping substandard cheese to Goronia?

D: Are there any exporters of cheese to Goronia whose merchandise is never rejected by the Cheese Importation Board?

E: How is the cheese rejected by the Cheese Importation Board disposed of?

完全不知道是什么

个人观点： 

  A．whether the cheeses produce in Goronia or abroad is irrelevant to conclusion of reasoning.

  B.  the thing what happened “over the last several years” is out of scope, This answer changes the time limited in the reasoning.

  D.  the word “any” or “never” used in the answer is so absolute, and “the exporters” is out of scope, the reasoning is concerning importers rather than exporters.

  E:  how is the ejected cheese disposed by Goronia is out of scope, the reasoning gives no information about this disposal.

  C: Correct. The different answers of this statement can strengthen or weaken the given argument.

A: 进口的奶酪是否含有本地产的奶酪(本地产,无关)

B: 在过去几年中,奶酪进口审查委员会有没有通过减少支出,来消除委员会内部的组织效率低下 (概念偷换,这里不是讨论机构改良,而是是否取消该机构,改良的再好与题干无关)

C: 审查委员会颁布的拒收条款,有没有制止奶酪进口商将不合格的奶酪运来卖?
取是,REJECTION将不合格产品概率减少到１％左右，说明该委员会的存在对企图蒙混过关的次品进口商有威慑作用，也是将不合格品率维持在可以忽略的１％的原因，取消委员会，不合格率一定会上升到不可以忽略的程度，损害当地人健康；　
取非，有没有委员会，合格率都是固定在１％，与健康无损，当然取缔．　

E: 那些被审查委员会拒绝收的奶酪如何处置?　（明显无关）

evaluating的题型,答案为是,支持,答案为否,削弱,or vice versa

答案是C