Re: [CR. ] 請教版大

[danyuchn (Javy)]

※ 引述《lifeandjob (lifeandjob)》之銘言：
: 剛剛看到看到這個題目
: 請問為什麼答案是E
: Because it was long thought that few people would watch lengthy televised
: political messages, most televised political advertisements,
: like commercial advertisements, took the form of short messages.
: Last year, however, one candidate produced a half-hour-long advertisement.
: During the half hour the advertisement was aired,
: a substantial portion of the viewing public tuned into the advertisement.
: Clearly, then, many more people are interested in watching lengthy televised
: political messages than was previously thought.
: Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument
: depends?
: A. The candidate's ratings improved significantly as a result of the
: half-hour-long political advertisement.
: B. Political advertisements have become increasingly influential in
: determining voters' decisions at the polls.
: C. Many people would appreciate the opportunity to become better acquainted
: with political candidates' views on current political issues.
: D. Most people who are interested in political issues watch television
: regularly.
: E. Most of the viewers who tuned in to the candidate's half-hour-long
: advertisement last year did not change channels after the first few minutes.
: http://www.facebook.com/gmat.beat

推 Organizer:其他看起來都無關 我覺得E 你把not拿掉
→ Organizer:1. 有些人轉台到那台看這個很長的廣告---
→ Organizer:2.結論: 大家比以前愛看常的政治廣告
→ Organizer:E not 拿掉以後 是說很多人轉台幾分鐘以後就轉台了
→ Organizer:就是說大家有轉台 可是一下就轉台 代表他們還是沒興趣
→ Organizer:是反駁 所以放回去就是假設了 不知道這樣解釋可以嗎
在這裡提供一個小技巧，是我實戰時用的：

通常在assumption題，刪除常見錯誤選項(明顯無關、立場違背)之後
很多人都會用"取非削弱結論"策略來找正確答案

然而，我知道不少人像我一樣，
只要選項句子一長，把選項取非可能還好，
但再看是否削弱這個階段就會變得有點吃力
因為取非削弱的步驟太邏輯學了，並不貼近我們平常生活中的邏輯。

這時，我會做一件事──

把我懷疑可能是假設的選項取非後，加上三個字：「就不要」放在主結論後

也就是心中念一遍「主結論是對的/會成功，就不要(取非選項)」

比如像這一題E我就會這樣念：
「大家的確比平常愛看長的正確廣告，
但就不要很多人轉過去幾分鐘之後又轉掉」

念起來邏輯正確吧？那就是他了。


其實這也算是走取非削弱的路子，
只不過我是選擇把硬梆梆的邏輯策略轉成貼近生活的用語，
可以加速正面思考找出正確選項。

Dustin

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) 
◆ From: 114.45.14.247