#1
Many pregnant women suffer from vitamin deficiency, but this is frequently not due to vitamin deficiency in their diets; most often it is because they have higher requirements for vitamins than do the rest of the population.
Which of the following, if true, would be most damaging to the argument above?
正解:
fails to employ the same reference group for both uses of the term” vitamin deficiency”
為何不是provides insufficient information about the incidence of vitamin deficiency in other groups with high vitamin requirement
題目說: 因(孕婦對維他命需求高於其他人)-->果(孕婦患維他命缺乏)
我的思路,可由1. “比較基礎不同”出發, or 2.因果不成立 weaken
答案句”provides insufficient information about the incidence of vitamin deficiency in other groups with high vitamin requirements”不是在”因” question使因果成立受質疑嗎?
#2
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers is a costly mistake, because all its labor disputes must then be settled by binding arbitration, without any negotiated public-sector labor settlements guiding the arbitration. Strikes should be outlawed only for categories of public-sector workers for whose services no acceptable substitute exists.
The statements above best support which of the following conclusions?
(A)Where public-service workers are permitted to strike, contract negotiations with those to strike, contract negotiations with those workers are typically settled without a strike.
(B)Where strikes by all categories of public-sector workers are outlawed, no acceptable substitutes for the services provided by any of those workers are available.
(C)Binding arbitration tends to be more advantageous for public-service workers where it is the only available means of settling labor disputes with such workers.
(D)Most categories of public-sector workers have no counterparts in the private sector.
(E)A strike by workers in a local government is unlikely to be settled without help from an arbitrator.
這題好繞喔!!不太瞭題目focus於何?? :'(
