[求助]GWD-3-32

sunjueliang

Newspaper editorial:

In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

1. Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
2. Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.
3. The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
4. Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.
5. The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

I choose C; The answer seems to be A, sorry, I cannot remember.

uniqueness

1.这道题偶选A.

2. 问题问的这篇短文成立的前提是什么. 当我看到问题但还未去看五个答案时, 我的脑海里对这一前提的反映就是参加监狱里的大学课程能有助于防止犯罪. 然后再看答案, 显然答案A是我的想法的双重否定.

3. 其它选项都不相干. C的意思是说选了大学课程的囚犯不比不选的人会犯罪的可能性小. 所以和原问意思矛盾.

jojof5460

I will choose c

C的意思是那些参加大学课程的囚犯原本并非是比别的囚犯更不容易再次犯罪的.换言之，在其它条件相同的情况下，学了课程的囚犯如果不容易犯罪，那么学课程就是有用处的。如果这个不成立，那么就是说，本来这些人就是“向善”的，很简单，学不学这个大学课程并不会影响其犯罪。那么结论“与其初衷相反”就不成立了。

meimei5656

我选A

原文的推论是：政府官员不让inmate接受大学水平课程（作为一种苛刻的监狱条件）——》这个措施导致政府不能降低犯罪率。理由是：在监狱里接受

大学水平课程的inmate出监狱后犯罪比其他inmate犯罪少（就是说要inmate接受大学水平课程）

问assumption

A说：在监狱中接受大学课程能阻止任何人犯罪，这种罪是不接受大学教育的inmate会犯的——》是assumption

C说：在监狱中接受大学课程的inmate不是更不可能（可能）比其他inmate在出狱后犯罪——》反了

bfghdggf

A的意思是，没能接受这个大学课程的教育不可能阻止任何人犯本来要犯的罪的。它的逆否命题是要阻止任何人犯原本要犯的罪是一定要在监狱里接受大学教育。