GWD3-Q16:
Economist: Tropicorp, which constantly seeksprofitable investment opportunities, has been buying and clearing sections oftropical forest for cattle ranching, although pastures newly created therebecome useless for grazing after just a few years. The company has not gone into rubber tapping,even though greater profits can be madefrom rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out ofeconomic self-interest. However, these environmentalists are probablywrong. The initial investment requiredfor a successful rubber-tapping operation is larger than that needed for acattle ranch. Furthermore, there is ashortage of workers employable in rubber-tapping operations, and finally, taxesare higher on profits from rubber tapping than on profits from cattle ranching. However前反后支，都在前面，态度一致反对。第二个还是一个结论。文章argument是economist态度，不是environmentalist的态度
In theeconomist’s argument, the two boldfacedportions play which of the following roles?
A. The first supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument;the second calls that conclusion into question.
B. The first states theconclusion of the economist’s argument; thesecond supports that conclusion.
C. ！The firstsupports the environmentalists’ conclusion; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first states theenvironmentalists’ conclusion; the second states the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
E. Each supports the conclusion of the economist’s argument.
This question is tricky. But if you focus on the BF, it is rather easy. What we have here is:
The company has not gone into rubber tapping,even though greater profits can be madefrom rubber tapping, which leaves the forest intact. Thus, some environmentalists conclude that Tropicorp has not acted wholly out ofeconomic self-interest.
This is a complete argument. Thus leads the conclusion. Whatever is before Thus is the premise.
C) is the answer.作者: stoner28 时间: 2012-2-8 06:43
Thanks, I think I got ur point. Just focus on the logical pattern. So, u agree with me that the question is a littlt bit illogical concerning the environmental behavior?作者: linmeimeiei 时间: 2012-2-8 20:48
No. The environmentalist do have their points because Tropicorp chooses cattle over rubber, and the latter could generate more profit than the former.作者: tulip37 时间: 2012-2-9 06:33
我不觉得"the latter could generate more profit than the former". 后面那个公司自己都说了理由. 当然有可能环境学家对, 谁知道呢.
