阅读正文

关于“木川”的疑问及八戒个人逻辑小结

[日期:2005-02-20] 来源:ChaseDream论坛 作者:八戒 [字体: ]

--  作者:八戒
--  发布时间:2003-8-14 11:28:00

--  关于“木川”的疑问及八戒个人逻辑小结![原创]

紧急求助版主和大牛-关于逻辑的思维方向
困惑!!!费费在讲逻辑演绎题中的削弱时说过,反对就是反对结论,而且我还记得他说过不能反对原因。这两天我在网上down了网友的钱勇强的逻辑笔记,说反对一定是反对原因。原话是这样的:
读者应当注意到反对的重点在于前提,达到的效果一定使结论不对,不论是直接反对原因还是对前提事实做出另一种说明都是从前提入手,所以考生应该在找出并理解前提和结论后,把解题重点放在前提中。

我想肯定很多大牛对此不屑,只要是能够作对,管他是反对结论还是反对前提,都没错。可是本人实在愚钝,要是脑子转不过这个筋,我心里就七上八下。比如有一道题是这样:
Doctors in Britain have long suspected that patients who wear tinted eyeglasses are abnormally prone to depression and hypochondria. Psychological tests given there to hospital patients admitted for physical complaints like heart pain and digestive distress confirmed such a relationship. Perhaps people whose relationship to the world is psychologically painful choose such glasses to reduce visual stimulation, which is perceived as irritating. At any rate, it can be concluded that when such glasses are worn, it is because the wearer has a tendency to be depressed or hypochondriacal。

23. Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

(A) Some people wear tinted glasses not because they choose to do so but because a medical condition of their eyes forces them to do so.

(B) Even a depressed or hypochondriacal person can have valid medical complaints, so a doctor should perform all the usual objective tests in diagnosing such persons.

(C) The confirmatory tests were not done for places such as western North America where the usual quality of light differs from that prevailing in Britain.

(D) Fashions with respect to wearing tinted glasses differ in different parts of the world.

(E) At the hospitals where the tests were given, patients who were admitted for conditions less ambiguous than heart pain or digestive distress did not show the relationship between tinted glasses and depression or hypochondria

看这几道题,答案是其次,关键是看看怎么反对。A和D是属于他因反对。而B和D确实是置疑了前提,请问大牛,这种说法对么?那么就是说费费说得不对了?还是我记错了?
因为在错题过程中,迷惑选项特别多,所以我觉得搞清楚答案的方向和ETS的思维很关键。
强烈请求大牛和版主的指导。
感谢。

 


og逻辑的第14道题我实在不理解,有那位高手师傅可以帮忙解释一下,我的邮箱ffanghua@hotmail.com,非常感谢了

 

近来几日做狒狒的逻辑,偶有收获...颇有感触...希望以大家交流一下学习的感受!

先强调一下,狒狒的观点是没有错的,主要能参透他的GMAT思维,八戒浅谈一下感受,希望大家一起交流!
一家之言而已.......呵.........

演绎题,最关键的就是weaken,只要能把weaken摆平了,我想其他问题都不大拉(反正我自己是这么觉得的,毕竟逻辑中weaken还是考得最多的!)

先看一道OG题吧!
(用中文吧,不写原文了)

一套系统可以防止飞机失事,但未经过检验。
但飞行员拒绝使用,因为这套系统未经过检验。

来看一下演绎方向:
我初看的时候,是这样的:

“这套系统未经过检验”是前提,结论是“飞行员拒绝使用”
那也就是前提结论型!
可答案和我的思路不一样!
于是重看狒狒的笔记,感触如下:

A为前提,是不可推倒的事实,B为推测!
豁然开朗!
这么来看,
前提就是“飞行员拒绝使用”(这是一个已经成立的事实),
推测原因(也就是B)是“系统未经过检验”
演绎方向“因果型”

小结:
演绎题目中:前提一定是一个事实(做任何题目,只要看到事实就知道是个前提,比如有很多的题目是一帮反对什么东西,然后有很多原因,前提就是他们反对(这是一个事实),后面就是解释的原因!,另外一类题目是做什么调查,结果为什么东西,这个调查是个事实,也就是前提,后面当然也为解释!)
用这种方法思维,屡试不爽呀!
(但有一种除外,也就是大家近来经常提到的OG中的第14题,待会儿再讨论)

来看一下木川(呵...是不是樱木花道和流川枫组合的超级塞亚人呀??呵...)的题目:
A前提是个事实,
那也就是:Doctors in Britain have long suspected that patients who wear tinted eyeglasses are abnormally prone to depression and hypochondria。
(非常明显,这就是一个事实,那也就是前提A,无论任何情况之下都不能反对,选项也证明了这一点)

后面有两个B进行解释(且称为B1和B2)
B1就是:
Psychological tests given there to hospital patients admitted for physical complaints like heart pain and digestive distress confirmed such a relationship.
演绎方向为:因果型!
weaken,ETS的方向是他因解释前提!
        但选项中没有!
  另外一种思路就是断桥和他因反对B1
  选项中B、C、E都是说这个tests不行!
  其中B、C都是说这个tests没有代表性,所以为断桥!
  E则直接说这个tests不对,为他因否认B1!
B2为:
Perhaps people whose relationship to the world is psychologically painful choose such glasses to reduce visual stimulation, which is perceived as irritating. At any rate, it can be concluded that when such glasses are worn, it is because the wearer has a tendency to be depressed or hypochondriacal。
在B2中又有一个演绎,
且称前提为小a,推测为小b(chasedream好象没有办法显示大小写!)
小a为:when such glasses are worn(这是一个事实)
小b为:the wearer has a tendency to be depressed or hypochondriacal。(解释)

演绎方向:因果型!
选项A为他因解释前提小a,为ETS非常喜欢的weaken方向。

如果八戒的推理没有错的话,
答案应该为D!

再谈一下,OG的第14题目。
咱们先回顾一下狒狒笔记上的一道题目:
milks在乐观的条件下可以放14天,if改到8天,价格下降,质量不变!

前提为:改到8天
结论为:价格下降,质量不变
演绎方向为:前提结论
答案我想大家记得很清楚:milks很难达到乐观的条件。
非常明显,这是一个反对前提的weaken
(那岂不是和狒狒的观点相反,前提不可否认!我这不搬石头砸自己的脚吗?)

其实不然,大家自己看,这边有一个if(这是最关键的),也就是“如果”,演绎方向当然是:前提结论。
这种情况下:前提就是个假设,是可以反对的!!!

再来看OG14题目
as long as的作用和if一样
前提,没有伤害到别人
结论:有权力决定是否带安全带!
答案:反对前提,伤害到了别人拉!!

这是八戒近来的一点收获
(要去吃午饭和谁午觉了,大家先批评一下,下午回来再做修改吧!!)

 

--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:qiqi_cola
--  发布时间:2003-8-14 20:10:00

-- 
费费这个宝贝东西哪里有?好象下载专区没有啊。。。。。。。
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:dreadpower
--  发布时间:2003-8-14 23:10:00

-- 
我做逻辑题,根本就没时间考虑属于哪种题目,演绎或推理,

     完全就是凭感觉~~~~~~~~~~~~

     我觉得真的没时间去考虑这些啊~~~~
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:tyou
--  发布时间:2003-8-15 6:50:00

-- 
Hi, can you tell me where i can    download 钱勇强的逻辑笔记  ?   ???

Many thanks
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:祈晴坊主
--  发布时间:2003-8-17 13:23:00

-- 
有收获

谢谢八戒
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:iamnone
--  发布时间:2003-9-9 18:05:00

-- 
我也想知道哪里有费费逻辑DOWN
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:braveMBA
--  发布时间:2003-9-10 0:41:00

-- 
八戒,这回带你去女儿国溜达一圈,算是奖励。
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:vrylwj
--  发布时间:2003-9-10 3:30:00

-- 
八戒总结的很好,偶很有收获。
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:freegirl
--  发布时间:2003-9-10 11:23:00

-- 

有道理,理顺了思路也!八戒再接再厉!
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:atongmu
--  发布时间:2003-9-10 12:11:00

-- 
我的体会是:如前辈牛人所述,以weaken为首的演绎题的确就是抓住结论。不过那部分为结论不能光看because,thus之类的提示词。根据kaplan教程把提干分为evidence和conclusion更加利于抓住逻辑提干的本质。拿八戒的例子:一套系统可以防止飞机失事,但未经过检验。
但飞行员拒绝使用,因为这套系统未经过检验。如果光看because就会认为“这套系统未经过检验”是原因,"飞行员拒绝使用"是结果。事实上推理中"飞行员拒绝使用"是一个evidence,而conclusion正是某些人的解释“这套系统未经过检验”。这个conclusion正是我们要weaken的对象。

 

 

[此贴子已经被作者于2003-9-10 12:15:11编辑过]
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:luoyx
--  发布时间:2003-9-12 19:45:00

-- 
这种推理说实话在考试时根本用不上。因为没有时间。其实这题非常简单。绝大多数人做错估计都是没看懂题目。

题目前提是:某个试验发现带眼镜与心理障碍有关。结论是:有心理障碍的人喜欢带眼镜。

B,C, E削弱试验。A是它因削弱结论。只有D与前提结论都无关。
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:fyhllj
--  发布时间:2003-9-12 23:11:00

-- 
"我的体会是:如前辈牛人所述,以weaken为首的演绎题的确就是抓住结论。不过那部分为结论不能光看because,thus之类的提示词。根据kaplan教程把提干分为evidence和conclusion更加利于抓住逻辑提干的本质。拿八戒的例子:一套系统可以防止飞机失事,但未经过检验。
但飞行员拒绝使用,因为这套系统未经过检验。如果光看because就会认为“这套系统未经过检验”是原因,"飞行员拒绝使用"是结果。事实上推理中"飞行员拒绝使用"是一个evidence,而conclusion正是某些人的解释“这套系统未经过检验”。这个conclusion正是我们要weaken的对象。"

I agree with above opnion and Bajie\'s reasoning. But we need time to test it and practise it.
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:atongmu
--  发布时间:2003-9-13 15:07:00

-- 

以下是引用luoyx在2003-9-12 19:45:00的发言:
这种推理说实话在考试时根本用不上。因为没有时间。其实这题非常简单。绝大多数人做错估计都是没看懂题目。


如果能在读题时分清evidence和conclusion,绝对有助于快速解题。


--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:isuffering
--  发布时间:2003-9-27 13:52:00

-- 
可是我读了几遍还是认为此题D是它因削弱,B是无关,所以答案是B.

谁能帮忙确认加解释一下?

非常感谢。

--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:miejue
--  发布时间:2003-9-27 22:22:00

-- 

以下是引用isuffering在2003-9-27 13:52:00的发言:
可是我读了几遍还是认为此题D是它因削弱,B是无关,所以答案是B.

 


5555。。。。。。。。。。我和你的想法一样。。。。难道答案真的不是B吗?
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:PopularKing
--  发布时间:2003-9-28 1:04:00

-- 
Who has the official ans?

B. indicates that wearing tinted glass is a fashion, not because people depressed. Therefore weakens the conclusion that "depressed people choose to wear them".

Plus, I don\'t think "这套系统未经过检验" is the conclusion,  while "飞行员拒绝使用" clearly is.  Please help!!!!!!!!!
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:祈晴坊主
--  发布时间:2003-9-29 15:41:00

-- 
yeah

still puzzling too
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:atongmu
--  发布时间:2003-9-29 15:53:00

-- 

以下是引用PopularKing在2003-9-28 1:04:00的发言:
Plus, I don't think "这套系统未经过检验" is the conclusion,  while "飞行员拒绝使用" clearly is.  Please help!!!!!!!!!


“飞行员拒绝使用”已经是一个无法改变的事实,所以这部分是不能weaken的。这个事实引出了一些人的讨论“为什么飞行员不愿意使用”的原因,其中文中这部分人的结论是“因为这套系统未经过检验”。weaken的对象只能是这些人的结论。
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:jq_jou
--  发布时间:2003-9-30 9:09:00

-- 

以下是引用八戒在2003-8-14 11:28:00的发言:
A前提是个事实,
那也就是:Doctors in Britain have long suspected that patients who wear tinted eyeglasses are abnormally prone to depression and hypochondria。
(非常明显,这就是一个事实,那也就是前提A,无论任何情况之下都不能反对,选项也证明了这一点)

后面有两个B进行解释(且称为B1和B2)
B1就是:
Psychological tests given there to hospital patients admitted for physical complaints like heart pain and digestive distress confirmed such a relationship.
演绎方向为:因果型!
weaken,ETS的方向是他因解释前提!
        

 


谢谢分享, 有个疑问: A)前提是DOCTOR\'S SUSPITION, 这种主观思想也可以作为\'不可推翻的事实\' 吗? 谢谢


--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:anchoret
--  发布时间:2003-9-30 9:12:00

-- 

以下是引用atongmu在2003-9-13 15:07:00的发言:
如果能在读题时分清evidence和conclusion,绝对有助于快速解题。

 

 


这一点非常重要!!!!请大家一定注意
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:js3260
--  发布时间:2003-9-30 10:06:00

-- 
那道戴眼镜的题目,我怎么也是觉得选B呀, 各位NN怎么分析得头头是道都觉得选D呢....可是,D 明明削弱嘛. 敬请指教.
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:小彩
--  发布时间:2004-3-16 21:39:00

-- 

以下是引用anchoret在2003-9-30 9:12:00的发言:

以下是引用atongmu在2003-9-13 15:07:00的发言:
如果能在读题时分清evidence和conclusion,绝对有助于快速解题。

 

 


这一点非常重要!!!!请大家一定注意

strongly agree.....
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:bigmouse
--  发布时间:2004-5-3 19:14:00

-- 
这么好的帖子,顶一下,别沉底了!
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:dmqyql
--  发布时间:2004-5-4 11:22:00

-- 
ft, I think B is correct. The sentence is irrelevant with this argument.  I hope somebody can give the exact answer.
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:Andrea625
--  发布时间:2004-6-30 12:12:00

-- 

Questions 22-23

Doctors in Britain have long suspected that patients who wear tinted eyeglasses are abnormally prone to depression and hypochondria. Psychological tests given there to hospital patients admitted for physical complaints like heart pain and digestive distress confirmed such a relationship. Perhaps people whose relationship to the world is psychologically painful choose such glasses to reduce visual stimulation, which is perceived as irritating. At any rate, it can be concluded that when such glasses are worn, it is because the wearer has a tendency to be depressed or hypochondriacal.

22.   The argument assumes which one of the following?

(A) Depression is not caused in some cases by an organic condition of the body.

(B) Wearers do not think of the tinted glasses as a means of distancing themselves from ocher people.

(C) Depression can have many causes, including actual conditions about which it is reasonable for anyone to be depressed.

(D) For hypochondriacs wearing tinted glasses, the glasses serve as a visual signal to others that the wearer’s health is delicate.(E)

(E) The tinting does not dim light to the eye enough to depress the wearer’s mood substantially.

23.   Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

(A) Some people wear tinted glasses not because they choose to do so but because a medical condition of their eyes forces them to do so.

(B) Even a depressed or hypochondriacal person can have valid medical complaints, so a doctor should perform all the usual objective tests in diagnosing such persons.

(C) The confirmatory tests were not done for places such as western North America where the usual quality of light differs from that prevailing in Britain.

(D) Fashions with respect to wearing tinted glasses differ in different parts of the world.(B)

(E) At the hospitals where the tests were given, patients who were admitted for conditions less ambiguous than heart pain or digestive distress did not show the relationship between tinted glasses and depression or hypochondria.

从大全copy的,兰色的是答案。有疑问请找gemj。

 

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-6-30 12:12:35编辑过]
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:eyiqiong
--  发布时间:2004-7-24 18:28:00

-- 

那位nn能指导一下evidence和conclusion到底怎么快速看出来?是不是事实就是evidence,臆断的就是conclusion呢?

 
--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:gmat700+
--  发布时间:2004-9-10 1:45:00

-- 

I can not understand why C can weaken the arguement. I think C is irrelevant to the reasoning.

The arguement focuses on the relationship between the tinged sun glasses and the depression, and doesn\'t say anything about the quality of light. Even if the quality of light in Britain is different from that of western North America, the arguement about the relationship between wearing tinged glasses and depression still can hold.

Who can explain why the test done in western North America may weaken the conclusion?

--------------------------------------
 
--  作者:eSpirit
--  发布时间:2004-10-15 22:49:00

-- 

以下是引用gmat700+在2004-9-10 1:45:00的发言:
I can not understand why C can weaken the arguement. I think C is irrelevant to the reasoning.

The arguement focuses on the relationship between the tinged sun glasses and the depression, and doesn\'t say anything about the quality of light. Even if the quality of light in Britain is different from that of western North America, the arguement about the relationship between wearing tinged glasses and depression still can hold.

Who can explain why the test done in western North America may weaken the conclusion?

C说这样的测试在美国(也不一定说要在美国,只要不在英国就可以)没有做啊,题目只是说在英国做了这样的测试后,就得出结论说只要戴眼镱的都容易有这样的倾向。所以C指出这样的推理是以偏概全的。

--------------------------------------
原文引自:
https://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?boardid=24&id=11199

参与签证讨论及查看讨论及查看更多的相关文章请访问【GMAT逻辑专区】
https://forum.chasedream.com/list.asp?boardid=24

打印 | 录入:Zeros
相关文章      
ChaseDream版权声明
活动日历
{{item.event_geo.name}}

{{item.subject}}

<< 查看更多 >>