og_11_023/ og_10_043
43. With the emergence of biotechnology companies, it was feared that they would impose silence about proprietary（所有权的） results on their in–house researchers and their academic consultants. This constraint, in turn, would slow the development of biological science and engineering. —>结论：保密会减慢生物科学的发展
Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above?
A. Biotechnological research funded by industry has reached some conclusions that are of major scientific importance. —>加强结论：如果确实“被认定会保密”，有重大发现当然会阻碍科学发展。削弱要从“这种认为不会出现”入手，A没有提供理由来证实“这种认识不会出现”，属于路线型错误
B. When the results of scientific research are kept secret, independent researchers are unable to build on those results. —>同A，强调保密会阻碍科学发展
C. Since the research priorities of biotechnology companies are not the same as those of academic institutions, the financial support of research by such companies distorts the research agenda. —>议程受资金的影响发生改变与保密无关
D. To enhance the companies’ standing in the scientific community, the biotechnology companies encourage employees to publish their results, especially results that are important. —>这些公司的动机是要使自己成为行业领袖，因此鼓励公开专利，削弱前提
D
E. Biotechnology companies devote some of their research resources to problems that are of fundamental scientific importance and that are not expected to produce immediate practical applications. —>“没有立即的现实功用”与原文的“减慢发展速度”意思吻合，不削弱
39. Most archaeologists have held that people first reached the Americas less than 20,000 years ago by crossing a land bridge into North America. But recent discoveries of human shelters in South America dating from 32,000 years ago have led researchers to speculate that people arrived in
Which of the following, if it were discovered, would be pertinent evidence against the speculation above?
A. A rock shelter near
B. Some North American sites of human habitation predate any sites found in
C. The climate is warmer at the 32,000-year-old South American site than at the oldest known North American site. —>气候不能反驳结论
D. The site in
B
E. The last Ice Age, between 11,500 and 20,000 years ago, considerably lowered worldwide sea levels. —>同A
这两道题都是选项直接反对了前提,成为了正确答案,但是更多的题反对前提不是答案,到底如何判断到底是不是答案呢?
贴一个新东方蓝皮上的26题，这题反对前提的答案不是答案。。
Lawmaker: Rasing taxes is not the only means of reducing government debt. The government's stockpile of helium is worth 25 percent more, at current market prices, than the debt accumulated in acquiring and storing it. Therefore, by selling the helium, the government can not only pay off that debt but reduce its overall debt as well.
which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A The government has no current need for helium.这道题不选A的理由，上课的时候费费说是反对了前提，所以不选，我理解的是not + weaken，weaken既是： The government has current need for helium，所以不能卖，所以反对了前提。。
反对前提，绝对不是反对原文出现的内容，
它是一种（唐突）的违背原文的（客观）信息，
1 必须是硬生生的违背，若加了其它反对的解释，那就不能认为它没可能对
2 客观信息，多指代第一手信息，一般是作者先提出的，包括引用的数据，例子，公理。
任何从第一手信息推测出来的东西，都可以成为攻击的对象。
好， 现在说你的例子。
先说第三个， 这选项根本就是与原文无关，政府需不需要HEL，与这个HEL能否帮助 扭亏为盈 没有关系。
若结论是应该用HEL，那还有点关系， 哪找出来的反对前提， 费费晕了应该。
第二个， 从researcher推出的想法是可以攻击的，因为某个人的观点总能从 信息全面性的角度 有缺陷。
它不是客观事实吧， 不是前提。
第一个， 你认为最后一句话是结论是吧， 错！
刻意划分前提和结论，有的时候就是误导你。 关键要找的不是结论，而是作者侧重于表达什么，即作者的观点。
第一题 中间那半句才是作者侧重于表达的内容，而后面那句是对观点的进一步解释。
而答案就反对了这半句，没有问题，因为这半句依然是人们的猜想，不是事实。 相反，答案是用事实。用事实反对猜想，怎么不合理呢。
谢谢两位的精彩讲解,我就是不太明白前提的定义,前提是不是等于evidence呢？照你们的解释好像是等于了，我理解的前提就是作者给出的一个条件，在这个条件的基础上做出的推理，所以当你反对前提的时候，那整个推理就不存在了，我脑子到底出什么问题了。。有谁能帮我一把。。感谢不尽~~~
第三题 对前提的理解有误。
前提和结论应该是在逻辑链中说话的。
第三题的逻辑链是：前提The government's stockpile of helium is worth 25 percent more, at current market prices, than the debt accumulated in acquiring and storing it.————结论by selling the helium, the government can not only pay off that debt but reduce its overall debt as well.
而A选项和逻辑链毫无关系 所以是无关选项。
og_11_023/ og_10_043
43. With the emergence of biotechnology companies, it was feared that they would impose silence about proprietary（所有权的） results on their in–house researchers and their academic consultants. This constraint, in turn, would slow the development of biological science and engineering. —>结论：保密会减慢生物科学的发展
Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above?
A. Biotechnological research funded by industry has reached some conclusions that are of major scientific importance. —>加强结论：如果确实“被认定会保密”，有重大发现当然会阻碍科学发展。削弱要从“这种认为不会出现”入手，A没有提供理由来证实“这种认识不会出现”，属于路线型错误
B. When the results of scientific research are kept secret, independent researchers are unable to build on those results. —>同A，强调保密会阻碍科学发展
C. Since the research priorities of biotechnology companies are not the same as those of academic institutions, the financial support of research by such companies distorts the research agenda. —>议程受资金的影响发生改变与保密无关
D. To enhance the companies’ standing in the scientific community, the biotechnology companies encourage employees to publish their results, especially results that are important. —>这些公司的动机是要使自己成为行业领袖，因此鼓励公开专利，削弱前提
D
E. Biotechnology companies devote some of their research resources to problems that are of fundamental scientific importance and that are not expected to produce immediate practical applications. —>“没有立即的现实功用”与原文的“减慢发展速度”意思吻合，不削弱
| 欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/) | Powered by Discuz! 7.2 |