在
131. To become an expert on a musical instrument, a person must practice. If a person practice a musical instrument for three hours each day, they will eventually become expert on that instrument. Therefore, if a person is an expert on a musical instrument, that person must have practiced for at least three hours each day.
Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning above?
A. The conclusion fails to take into account that people who practice for three hours every day might not yet have reached a degree of proficiency that everyone would consider expert.
B. The conclusion fails to take into account that practicing for less than three hours each day may be enough for some people to become experts.
C. the conclusion fails to take into account that if a person has not practiced for at least three hours a day, the person has not become an expert.
D. The conclusion fails to take into account that three consecutive hours of daily practice is not recommended by all music teachers.
E. The conclusion fails to take into account that few people have the spare time necessary to devote three hours daily to practice.
Reference:
In my view, the reasoning in this argument is that:
a person practice a musical instrument for three hours each day they will eventually become expert
Under this circumstance , it is obvious that the fact that a person practice a musical instrument for three hours each day is sufficient to reach the sound conclusion that they will eventually become expert on that instrument. But this fact is not the necessary factor relevant to the conclusion that they will eventually become expert on that instrument.
After this analysis, we can make clear the logical flaw in this argument.
a person is an expert on a musical instrument person must have practiced for at least three hours each day
So, we can easily find the correct answer is B.
Questions 132-133
Nature constantly adjusts the atmospheric carbon level. An increase in the level causes the atmosphere to hold more heat, which causes more water to evaporate from the oceans, which causes increased rain. Rain washes some carbon from the air into the oceans, where it eventually becomes part of the seabed. A decrease in atmosphere carbon causes decreased evaporation from the oceans, which cause less rain, and thus less carbon is washed into the oceans. Yet some environmentalists worry that burning fossil fuels may raise atmospheric carbon to a dangerous level. It is true that a sustained increase would threaten human life. But the environmentalists should relax---nature will continually adjust the carbon level.
132. Each of the following can be inferred from the information in the passage EXCEPT:
A. A decrease in the level of atmospheric heat causes a decrease in the amount of carbon that rain washes into the oceans from the air.
B. An increase in the level of carbon in the atmosphere causes increased evaporation of ocean water.
C. An increase in the level of atmospheric heat causes increased rainfall.
D. A decrease in the level of carbon in the atmosphere causes decreased evaporation of ocean water.
E. A decrease in the level of atmospheric heat causes a decrease in the level of carbon in the atmosphere.
Reference:
In my view, the reasoning in this argument is that:
On the one hand:
An increase in the level of carbon more heat more water to evaporate from the oceans increased rain washes more carbon from the air into the oceans becomes part of the seabed
On the other hand:
A decrease in atmosphere carbon less heat decreased evaporation from the oceans less rain washes less carbon from the air into the oceans
Hence, it is obvious that the correct answer is E.
133. Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument in the passage?
A. Plant life cannot survive without atmospheric carbon.
B. It is not clear that breathing excess carbon in the atmosphere will have a negative effect on human life.
C. Carbon is part of the chemical “blanket” that keeps the Earth warm enough to sustain human life.
D. Breathing by animals releases almost 30 times as much carbon as does the burning of fossil fuels.
E. The natural adjustment process, which occurs over millions of years, allow wide fluctuations in the carbon level in the short term.
Reference:
In my view, the reasoning in this argument is that:
nature will continually adjust the carbon level a sustained increase in the level of carbon would not threaten human life.
The statement of E points out that even the nature will continually adjust the carbon level, wide fluctuations in the carbon level in the short term will exert the remarkable negative to the human life.(Common sense tells us that the life of human is often less than 100 years)
So, E is the correct chose.
A. is out of scope.
B. to some extend, support the argument. Because we can not assure that breathing excess carbon in the atmosphere will have a negative effect on human life, even the excess carbon may not have the a negative effect on human life. Another logical flaw in the statement of B is out of scope.
C. to some extend, support the argument.
D is out of scope. If so , we should kill more animals to prevent the “Green House”.
134. The more television children watch, the less competent they are in mathematical knowledge. More than a third of children in the United States watch television for more than five hours a day; in South Korea the figure is only 7 percent. But whereas less than 15 percent of children in the United States understand advanced measurement and geometric concepts, 40 percent of South Korean children are competent in these areas. Therefore, if United States children are to do well in mathematics, they must watch less television.
Which one of the following is an assumption upon in advanced measurement and geometric concepts than are South Korean children?
A. Children in the United States are less interested in advanced measurement and geometric concepts than are South Korean children.
B. South Korean children are more disciplined about doing schoolwork than are
C. Children who want to do well in advanced measurement and geometry will watch less television.
D. A child’s ability in advanced measurement and geometry increases if he or she watches less than one hour of television a day.
E. The instruction in advanced measurement and geometric concepts available to children in the United States is not substantially worse than that available to South Korean children.
In my view, the reasoning in this argument is that:
More than a third of children in the United States watch television for more than five hours a day; in South Korea the figure is only 7 percent. But whereas less than 15 percent of children in the United States understand advanced measurement and geometric concepts, 40 percent of South Korean children are competent in these areas The more television children watch, the less competent they are in mathematical knowledge
Under this circumstance, it is obvious that the arguer establish the casual relationship between the television children watch and the competent they are in mathematical knowledge.
We can anticipate the correct answer of assumption from two directions. For one thing, the answer should assure the casual relationship between the television children watch and the competent they are in mathematical knowledge. For another, the answer should rule out other possibility that may lead to the more competent the children in South Korea are in mathematical knowledge.
After this anticipation, we can find that E is the sound chose. Because E rules out other possibility that may result in the more competent the children in South Korea are in mathematical knowledge.
A is out of scope. We cannot assure the casual relationship between the interest of children and the competent they are in mathematical knowledge.
B is out of scope too. The reasoning that the fact that South Korean children are more disciplined about doing schoolwork can result in the more competent the children in South Korea are in mathematical knowledge is open to doubt.
C is puzzle. At first glance, C may be the correct answer. But after a careful examination, we will find that C is incorrect. We cannot ensure the casual relationship between the televisions the children watch and the competent they are in mathematical knowledge either.
Such as, the students who want to crack GMAT will play less basketball. But we cannot guarantee the casual relationship between the ability of the students cracking GMAT and the activity of playing basketball.
D is out of scope. It is possible that more children in South Korea who watch television less than five hours but more than one hour a day than the children in US. If so , D has no effect on this argument.
135. In a new police program, automobile owners in some neighborhoods whose cars are not normally driven between 1 A.M. and 5 A.M. can display a special decal in the cars’ windows and authorize police to stop the cars during those hours to check the drivers’ licenses. The theft rate for cars bearing such decals is much lower than had been usual for cars in those neighborhoods.
If it is concluded from the statements above that automobile theft has been reduced by the program, which one of the following would be most important to answer in evaluating that conclusion?
A. Are owners who are cautious enough to join the program taking other special measures to protect their cars against theft?
B. In how many neighborhoods is the police program operating?
C. Are cars in neighborhoods that are actively participating in the program sometimes stolen during daylight hours?
D. Will owners who have placed decals on their cars’ windows but who find it necessary to drive between 1 A.M. and 5 A. M. Be harassed by police?
E. Are the neighborhoods in which the program has been put into effect a representative cross section of neighborhoods with respect to the types of automobiles owned by residents?
Reference:
In my view, the reasoning in this argument is that:
automobile owners in some neighborhoods whose cars are not normally driven between 1 A.M. and 5 A.M. can display a special decal in the cars’ windows and authorize police to stop the cars during those hours to check the drivers’ licenses The theft rate for cars bearing such decals is much lower than had been usual for cars in those neighborhoods
The hidden assumption is that the decrease in the theft rate for cars bearing such decals is due to the program.
Which is the best choice to evaluate the conclusion? It seems to me that the correct statement can either support or weaken the argument. That is to say, the answer is the two-side sword to the argument.
After this analysis, we can find that A is just choice.
If owners who are cautious enough to join the program taking other special measures to protect their cars against theft, A will weaken the argument. If not, A obviously support the argument.
Hence, A is the answer.
B is out of scope. The number of neighborhoods who is the police program operating is not mentioned in this argument.
C is out of scope too. Whether cars in neighborhoods that are actively participating in the program sometimes stolen during daylight hours has no influence in evaluating this conclusion.
D is false. If so , the answer may opposite the main presume in this argument.
E is out of scope.
