XY07第30题
Q30:Criminologist: Some legislators advocate mandating a sentence of life in prison for anyone who, having twice served sentences for serious crimes, is subsequently convicted of a third serious crime. These legislators argue that[b] such a policy would reduce crime dramatically[/b], since it would take people with a proven tendency to commit crimes off the streets permanently. What this reasoning overlooks, however, is that people old enough to have served two prison sentences for serious crimes rarely commit more than one subsequent crime.[b] Filling our prisons with such individuals would have exactly the opposite of the desired effect[/b], since it would limit our ability to incarcerate younger criminals, who commit a far greater proportion of serious crimes.
In the argument as a whole, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first is a conclusion that the argument as a whole seeks to refute; the second is a claim that has been advanced in support of that conclusion.
B. The first is a conclusion that the argument as a whole seeks to refute; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.
C. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second is an objection that has been raised against that conclusion.
D. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second is a prediction made on the basis of that conclusion.
E. The first is a generalization about the likely effect of a policy under consideration in the argument; the second points out a group of exceptional cases to which that generalization does not apply.
做题的时候再B和E之间犹豫了，最后选了E，答案却是B，鉴于GWD的答案都不是标准的，请大家说说吧。
我觉得E更加符合该题的特殊情况，是说前面的办法在这种特殊情况下不好用，B错在后面的一句不是结论，全文也也没有要全面推翻第一句的倾向
[[i] 本帖最后由 magicbabyg 于 2008-6-14 11:14 编辑 [/i]] 粗体部份没有复制出来，所以不能够判断。 Soooorry! 是我忽略了，上面已改正，谢谢！ E 错在 generalization 和 group of。such a policy would reduce crime dramatically 并不是 generalization，因为看不出是从什么 generalize 而来的。后面的 Filling our prisons with such individuals would have exactly the opposite of the desired effect 也不是 a group of exceptional cases。这只是讲一件事，不是一组事实。
B 没有错。后面正是 criminologist 的结论。为什么说不是结论？ What this reasoning overlooks, however, is that people old enough to have served two prison sentences for serious crimes rarely commit more than one subsequent crime
关键是这句的句意。如果是说绝大部分被判两次重刑的人都老的不会再多犯一次罪了，那就是我之前理解错了
谢谢你！ 这句的意思是：一个人的年纪大得够时间坐了两次牢，那就很少会再犯法了。 我的感觉是逻辑题目中有“claim/argue”等表示申明的句子一般都是position，或者结论。但得看清申明者是谁。如果后面有转折，那这个申明肯定是作者要反驳的，即前一个Claim肯定是作者反驳的，转折后面的Cliam才是作者的主态度。
本句中第二段黑体后有since，可见是对前句的解释，前句应该是主态度！B对 有道理。谢谢 还是不明白
回复 9# babybluejia 的帖子
不明白什么？页:
[1]