求助啊... 费费逻辑 62 谢谢咯！！！

EMMALIULIU

62. Brushing your teeth regularly no matter which toothpaste you use, will reduce your chances of tooth decay. Scientists have concluded that, when you brush, you reduce tooth decay by removing the film of plaque that forms on teeth and gums. So, you can forget about fluorides: brush your teeth carefully and say goodbye to cavities.
Which one of the following is a criticism of the reasoning in the argument?
(A) Brushing with fluoride toothpaste has been shown to reduce tooth decay.
(B) The fact that brushing will reduce tooth decay does not show that fluorides are of no value.
(C) Few people adequately remove plaque by brushing.
(D) People have plaque on their teeth most of the time.
(E) Scientists have been wrong about fluorides.

我觉得这道题的逻辑是这样的，作者说刷牙会告别牙洞，但并没有说只有刷牙才能告别牙洞——“brush your teeth carefully and say goodbye to cavities”并不是
“brushing your teeth carefully is the only way to say goodbye to cavities”的意思吧…
所以，我认为作者提倡只刷牙不用氟化物，但并没有否定氟化物的价值，而作者的推理里真正需要批判的是“只刷牙而不用氟化物是否有效”，而并不是
“氟化物是否有价值”，所以我选了C，答案是B...

不知道自己错在哪里，谢谢大家指点迷津！！！

EMMALIULIU

懂了~~~
灰常灰常感谢！！！

kurtsniper

Few people adequately remove plaque by brushing,只说明通过刷牙，去除plague不是很显著，但是光从这点不能说明"F"有用，是不是牙刷的问题，或者牙膏的问题，或者刷牙的姿势，或者夸张点说，是刷牙的时间问题，或者也可能是你理解的"F"的问题，但是都不确定。 B选项的意思是，刷牙去除plague的事实不能证明“F"没有价值，更直接的迎合了”批评了argument" (其实要搞清楚argument是说：光刷牙，不用考虑'F"，且题目要求批评这个论点是错误的“。   其实题目开始说的是plague,牙病，最后一句才说的是cavity牙洞。