三道LSAT题求助！

lala

11.“If the forest continues to disappear at its present pace, the koala will approach extinction,” said the biologist.
“So all that is needed to save the koala is to stop deforestation,” said the politician.
Which one of the following statements is consistent with the biologist’s claim but not with the politician’s claim?
(A) Deforestation continues and the koala becomes extinct.
(B) Deforestation is stopped and the koala becomes extinct.
(C) Reforestation begins and the koala survives.
(D) Deforestation is slowed and the koala survives.
(E) Deforestation is slowed and the koala approaches extinction.

5. All German philosphers, except for Marx, are idealists.
from which of the following can the statement above be most properly inferred?
A. Except for Marx, if someone is an idealist philosopher, then he or she is German.
B. Marx is the only non-German philosopher who is an idealist.
C. If a German is an idealist, then he or she is a philosopher, as long as he or she is not Marx.
D. Marx is not an idealist German philosopher.
E. Aside from the philosopher Marx, if someone is a German, then he or she is an idealist.

23. Teachers are effective only when they help their students become independent learners. Yet not until teachers have the power to make decisions in their own classrooms can they enable their students to make their own decisions. Students' capability to make their own decisions is essential to their becoming independent learners. Therefore, if teachers are to be effective, they must have the power to make decisions in their own classrooms.
According to the argument, each of the following could be true of teachers who have enabled their students to make their own decisions EXCEPT:
(A) Their students have not become independent learners.
(B) They are not effective teachers.
(C) They are effective teachers.
(D) They have the power to make decisions in their own classrooms.
(E) They do not have the power to make decisions

答案是B，E，E，为什么不是其它选项？是如何从题干中推出来的？

lala

Tongxun，看了您的解释，我有了一些启发。但还有一些不明，让我们再讨论讨论。

题目要求下面陈述与生物学家一致，与政治家不一致。政治家说stop deforestation是save the koala的必要条件，即save the koala-àstop deforestation。而生物学家说森林以现在的速度消失是koala灭绝的充分条件，即森林以现在的速度消失àkoala灭绝。AE与政治家一致(因为Deforestation continue/slow 都与政治家的stop deforestation 不一致，从而推出koala extinction)。C无关。BD选项且不考虑是否与政治家相一致，B首先与生物学家不一致：生物学家是A推B，而B选项却是A非与B并存。而且B也不与政治家一致：政治家是又一个A推B，而B选项是B与A非并存。相反D符合要求。您看呢？？？

第二题，我把题目关系搞反了。题目问的是，从哪一个选项可以抽象出题目的结论？而不是从题目中可以得到哪个选项的结论。

[此贴子已经被作者于2002-6-9 14:23:41编辑过]