GMAT逻辑-驳论方法似乎可以用于分析逻辑的weaken题
一篇规范的议论文包括三个要素----论点、论据和论证。论点通常可以理解为作者的观点或者结论,论据是作者用来证明论点的素材(证据),而论证则可以理解为推理的逻辑过程。所以,驳论型的文章最基本的方法也就有驳论点、驳论据以及驳论证。一个逻辑题通常可以看做一篇简单的议论文,三要素分别对应conclusion、evidence 和line of the reasoning;所以我们要反驳(weaken)它也就可以用上述方法:1)weaken它的conclusion,比如说如果这个结论真的正确,那么会有什么样的矛盾就会出现(或者说会危及相关主体的某个方面等等----典型的比如说,降工资会打击员工积极性从而降低生产效率);2)weaken它的evidence,即可能evidence是不准确的,或者说是不充分的等等;3)weaken 推理过程(line of the reasoning),最典型的就是两者时间上先后关系但并不一定构成因果或者A、B谁是因谁是果的问题等等。下面分别举几个例子:
1.驳论点(weakening the conclusion)
(OG10) 31. Some who favor putting governmental enterprises into private hands suggest that conservation objectives would in general be better served if private environmental groups were put in charge of operating and financing the national park system, which is now run by the government.
先提炼出这段话用什么evidence得出了怎样的conclusion
Putting national part system in the charge of private environmental group(论据)àthe system will be better served(论点)
然后对照选项分别与这个line的哪个要素(conclusion、evidence还是reasoning)对应,如果都无关直接pass,如果与其中一个要素有关,再分析是起什么作用。
Which of the following, assuming that it is a realistic possibility, argues most strongly against the suggestion above?
A. Those seeking to abolish all restrictions on exploiting the natural resources of the parks might join the private environmental groups as members and eventually take over their leadership.直接weaken结论(conclusion)。Correct
B. Private environmental groups might not always agree on the best ways to achieve conservation objectives. 跟论据有点关系,但是不能weaken到整个推理
C. If they wished to extend the park system, the private environmental groups might have to seek contributions from major donors and general public.无关
D. There might be competition among private environmental groups for control of certain park areas.跟B答案类似A
E. Some endangered species, such as the California condor, might die out despite the best efforts of the private environmental groups, even if those groups are not hampered by insufficient resources.无关
(OG10)18. A proposed ordinance requires the installation in new homes of sprinklers automatically triggered by the presence of a fire. However, a home builder argued that because more than ninety percent of residential fires are extinguished by a household member, residential sprinklers would only marginally decrease property damage caused by residential fires.
提炼文章信息:提炼的时候要注意题目的问法,weaken the home builder’s argument, 所以可以不用太关注题目的第一句话(很多时候类似的信息需要适当忽略以提高做题效率)。
More than ninety percent of residential fires are extinguished by argued that memberàresidential sprinklers would only marginally decrease property damage caused by residential fires.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the home builder’s argument?
A. most individuals have no formal training in how to extinguish fires. 无关
B. Since new homes are only a tiny percentage of available housing in the city, the new ordinance would beextremely narrow in scope. support而不是weaken
C. The installation of smoke detectors in new residences costs significantly less than the installation of sprinklers. cost 无关
D. In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the average time required by the fire department to respond to a fire was less than the national average.无关E
E. The largest proportion of property damage that results from residential fires is caused by fires that start when no household member is present. 正好weaken了结论,因为并不是marginally decrease property damage.Correct |