PP2 CR # 103

[autumn713]

103. Charleton recently wrote a scathing attack on Winfreed's theory about the origin of portraiture. Charleton would never have felt personally threatened by Winfreed's theory unless he believed, albeit subconsciously, that the theory was correct. Since Charleton is a distinguished art historian, his attack can actually be taken as confirmation of Winfreed's theory.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) Charleton would not have written a scathing attack on Winfreed's theory unless he had felt personally threatened by that theory.
(B) Charleton would attack a theory he believed was correct only if he did not consciously believe that it was correct.
(C) Charleton would write about Winfreed's theory only if his explicit purpose was to attack that theory.
(D) An attack on a theory about the origin of portraiture would serve as confirmation of that theory only if the attack were written by a distinguished art historian.
(E) Charleton's attack on Winfreed's theory would serve to confirm that theory only if the attack were scathing.


ANS: A.
一整個不知所以然...><
簡單說:
C寫了東西攻擊W.
除非它相信W正確　不然不會覺的被威脅
因為C是有名歷史學家　所以他的攻擊反而確立W李論

題目好怪喔　不了解他的思路
請提點

[dibert8]

這題好像是來套招的: only (武斷字眼) 不選.
有一個說法可以來理解為何不選:"不當限縮樣本或適用範圍" (摘自兔大的 CR 總結)