Re: [CR. ] 請教版大
※ 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
09/25 05:35,
09/25 05:35
→
09/25 05:36,
09/25 05:36
→
09/25 05:36,
09/25 05:36
→
09/25 05:37,
09/25 05:37
→
09/25 05:37,
09/25 05:37
→
09/25 05:37,
09/25 05:37
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
討論串 (同標題文章)
本文引述了以下文章的的內容：
完整討論串 (本文為第 3 之 3 篇)：