Board logo

标题: LSAT-9906-3-16 [打印本页]

作者: huahua115    时间: 2005-8-29 20:32     标题: LSAT-9906-3-16

Historian:we can learn about the medical history of individuals through chemical analysis of their hair. It is likely, for example, that Isaac Newton's psychological problems were due to mercury poisoning; traces of mercury were found in his hair. Analysis is now being done on a lock of Beethoven's hair. Although no convincing argument has shown that Beethoven ever had a venereal disease, some people hypothesize that venereal disease caused his deafness. Since mercury was commonly ingested in Beethoven's time to treat venereal disease, if researchers find a trace of mercury in his hair, we can conclude that this hypothesis is correct.
which one of the following is an assumption on which the historian's argument depends?
(A)None of the mercury introduced into the body can be eliminated.
(B)Some people in Beethoven's time did not ingest mercury.
(C)Mercury is an effective treatment for venereal disease.
(D)Mercury poisoning can cause deafness in people with venereal disease.
(E)Beethoven suffered from psychological problems of the same severity as Newton's

My point of view:'venereal disease'→'commonly ingest mercury', then 'no trace of mercury in his hair'→no 'venereal disease'.
B is the right answer.
HOW ABOUT A?????
作者: dhhgh11    时间: 2005-8-29 20:50

a不成立不会影响结论
文章的逻辑是治疗肾病用水银,那么只要发现老贝的头发里有水银,那就一定
是因为治疗肾病。那么假定必须是水银不会是因为别的原因进入身体,B就是
说人们通常不吃水银,恰好满足了这个要求。而A说,水银进入后就不会出来
,这只是一种支持,但不是假设,只能建立摄入水银和身体里有水银之间的联
系,而非本题要点。
作者: huahua115    时间: 2005-9-18 07:06

谢谢楼主!!!
作者: steveyangxt    时间: 2006-1-15 08:48

a取非不影响结论 。




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