Board logo

标题: 这类题从什么地方下手? [打印本页]

作者: samgxs    时间: 2002-12-1 12:32     标题: 这类题从什么地方下手?

Investigator: XYZ Coins has misled its clients by promoting some coins as “Extremely rare” when in fact those coins are relatively common and readily available.
XYZ agent: That is ridiculous. XYZ Coins is one of the largest coin  dealers in the world. We authenticated the coins we sell through a nationally recognized firm and operate a licensed coin dealership.

The XYZ agent’s reply is most vulnerable to the criticism that it

A: exaggerates the investigator’s claims in order to make them appear absurd
B: accuses the investigator of bias but presents no evidence to support that accusation
C: fails to establish that other coin dealers do not also authenticate the coins those dealers sell also authenticate the coins those dealers sell
D: lists strengths of XYZ Coins while failing to address the investigator’s charge
E: provides no definition for the inherently vague phrase “extremely rare”.
作者: Louisa_xy    时间: 2002-12-1 15:26

这种两人对话的题,我常做错。积累的一点经验:先概括每个人的论点,各自的论证方法,这样,逻辑错误或者第二个人用的 argumentive strategy就明显了。

比如说这道题,第一个人说:XYZ Coins把一些普通的coins说成是extremely rare是在误导客户。第二人列出了XYZ Coins的背景,但并没有就第一个人的观点说那些"extremely rare" coins如何如何。
我想是选D。

一个麻烦点的方法:把这类题收集一些,分析总结
作者: noyou    时间: 2002-12-2 06:29

我觉得也是D, XYZ没有针对Investigator的点子上说,茬题了。
作者: nicexiaoye    时间: 2002-12-2 16:11

我徘徊在B和D之间。why not B?
作者: samgxs    时间: 2002-12-2 17:29

答案是D,但是这类题我总感觉错的机会要大得多




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