就一道题请教假设、推断、支持的区别 各位牛牛

bradfordchens

是不是对选项取非，假设和推断题都能削弱原结论，那支持题呢。
还有是不是一个论断只能有一个assumption呢
例
Premise:Three years ago a business tax credit for research and
development was enacted into law for the purpose of stimulating
these business activities.
Premise:Overall business profits have risen seadily since the
enactment of this law.
Conclusion:The tax credit has fail to achieve its objective of
stimulating research and development.
答案给出的assumption:New investment in research and development
does not generally enhance business profits within a brief
period.
并且解释说以下为支持性论据：
The tax is small compared to the costs of new research and
development.
The general economic climate for business has remained at least
as healthy as it was three years ago.
Taxes on business have oterwise either remained at current levels
or declined during the same time period
个人感觉assumption和support都是排除他因或者消除gap。考试选项中不
会并存么，咋选呢?

dumengxuan

是不是对选项取非，假设和推断题都能削弱原结论，那支持题呢。

Answer: 对选项取非 Only works for NECESSARY assumption questions.


还有是不是一个论断只能有一个assumption呢

No. There might be millions of them.

bradfordchens

谢谢，对于必要假设我懂了。那推断题答案是从原文得出的，逆否成立，取非后就与原文相悖了。这样理解对么？

rmbaos

copy来的

first, the word “renaissance” (rebirth) implies that

transnational cooperation is now on the rise, after previously

having a lower level. so that takes care of the “lower in the

past” part of the correct answer.

second, the renaissance is described as “modest”. the only way

this description would be reasonable is if transnational

cooperation has not re-achieved its previous levels; there's the

“higher in the past” part.

"renaissance" implies that the level has gone up; "modest" implies

that it hasn't gone all the way back up to previous levels.

dumengxuan

那推断题答案是从原文得出的，逆否成立，取非后就与原文相悖了。这样理解对么？

The answer for an inference questions could be in many shapes.  If the missing part is a necessary assumption, negation method should work.  If the missing part is a conclusion, negation method might work as well.

If the missing part is a sufficient assumption, the negation method would not work.

Also, some inference questions are just a list of facts and not much logic involved.  In this case, the neagation method might not work.

bradfordchens

3q very much

Netherlanders

这道题没看懂。。。能解释一下么？
是让我们补充一个assumption，连同前面两个Premises，来支持conclusion么？可是这里面三者的因果关系怎么看不太懂呢。。。求LZ解惑，谢谢！