其实我们在GMAT解题的过程中把握一个宗旨，也许我们就会发现其实假设题型并非我们想象的那样难，这个宗旨就是：只需要找到一个能使得推理成立的条件或者说是必要条件，我们不需要去保证通过这个条件推理一定做到正确。下面就让我们通过实例进行GMAT逻辑推理错误解析。
无法找出题干中讨论对象之间的本质关系
例：A thorough search of Edgar Allan Poe's correspondence has turned up not a single letter in which he mentions his reputed morphine addiction. On the basis of this evidence it is safe to say that Poe's reputation for having been a morphine addict is undeserved and that reports of his supposed addiction are untrue.
Which of the following is assumed by the argument above?
(A) Reports claiming that Poe was addicted to morphine did not begin to circulate until after his death.
(B) None of the reports of Poe's supposed morphine addiction can be traced to individuals who actually knew Poe.
(C) Poe's income from writing would not have been sufficient to support a morphine addiction.
(D) Poe would have been unable to carry on an extensive correspondence while under the influence of morphine.
(E) Fear of the consequences would not have prevented Poe from indicating in his correspondence that he was addicted to morphine.
上述题干中提到：一、研究发现Poe的信件中未提及他患有吗啡瘾;二、Poe没有吗啡瘾
本题极力在让考生从“对Poe的信件调查[证据]→Poe未患有吗啡瘾[结论]”找出两者的内在联系，5个选项中也给出了不同的假设，那么我们只需通过反推，来找出一种能够使得推理成立的假设条件即可，但考生往往会抛开“信件调查”去思考其他使得上述结论正确的条件(假设)，换句话说考生往往会认为除了对信件的调查这样一个证据以外，还可以有其他证据能够推出Poe未患有吗啡瘾。通常来讲，当一个推理是从一个我们已知的，已经发生的事实推断出一个结论的时候，我们需要记住的就是，其中的隐含假设多为这个结论的唯一原因，换句话说，在本题中要想对Poe的信件做出说明，那么我们只能假定Poe不会因害怕后果而不在其信件中提及对吗啡的嗜好，本题的正确假设选项为E.
相关推荐:
