《毕出21套》解析：逻辑第1套

逻辑第 1 套

Studies have shown that people are swayed more by communications they believe are not intended to persuade than by those they believe are. Many politicians use this to their advantage by giving the impression of impromptu speech, when in fact their rhetoric is carefully scripted. Politicians who are skilled at giving this impression are thus able to convince many otherwise resistant listeners to adopt their point of view.

Which of the following is an assumption required by the explanation above?

(A) Listeners who are most successful at resisting politicians' rhetoric are those who know that that rhetoric is scripted.

(B) Most people cannot distinguish between communications that are and are not intended to persuade.

(C) Politicians are more skilled than most people at convincing listeners that their scripted rhetoric is actually impromptu.

(D) Politicians who are honest about their intention to persuade are generally less successful than those who are dishonest about their intention to persuade.

(E) Many people do not believe that impromptu speech is intended to be persuasive.

题干译文：

研究表明，比起意在劝说的交流，人们更容易被他们自认为并非为了劝说他们的交流所影响。（说人话就是：比起A君劝说意图明显的唠叨，大家更容易被B君的无心之言所影响）。很多政治学家会发表一些“即兴演讲”，但其实这些看似“即兴”的演讲是被精心设计过。所以呢，善于此套路的政治学家能忽悠很多反对者接受自己的政见。

问题：

传统文法——假设

思考方向（削弱）——善于此套路的政治学家并不见得能忽悠到很多反对者

选项解析：

A. 成功抵抗住忽悠的听众是那些知道演讲是被精心设计过的听众：本选项在讨论某一类型听众的特点，那不管这类听众是什么样的，都无法帮助我们判断“善于此套路能不能让政治学家劝服很多反对者”。

B. 大多数人无法区分意在劝说和无意劝说的交流：鉴于本选项是否定句，我们进行取非—— 大多数人可以区分“意在劝说”和“无意劝说”的交流。但不管能不能区分，如果我们无法得知大家把即兴演讲归为哪类，那么我们就无法判断大家会不会被政治学家忽悠成功。

C. 在劝服听众他们真的真的是在即兴演讲这件事上，政治学家比大多数人更有技巧：此选项讨论了政治学家的特点，并和其他人做了比较，但政治学家自身的特征与“善于此套路能不能让政治学家劝服很多反对者”这件事没有关系。

D. 坦诚自己劝说目的的政治学家没有隐瞒自己劝说目的的政治学家成功：政治学家是否诚实、是否更成功与结论无关。

E. 正确。很多人不相信即兴演讲是劝说意图明显的：鉴于本选项是否定句，我们进行取非——很多人认为即兴演讲是劝说意图明显的。如果大家一开始就把即兴演讲归为“劝说意图明显”的一类，那么无论政治学家怎么忽悠，听众都不会“上当”。

To improve the long-term savings rate of the citizens of Levaska, the country's legislature decided to implement a plan that allows investors to save up to $1,000 per year in special accounts without paying taxes on the interest earned unless withdrawals are made before the investor reaches age sixty-five. Withdrawals from these accounts prior to age sixty-five would result in the investor's having to pay taxes on all the accumulated interest at the time of withdrawal.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the prediction that the legislature's plan will have its intended effect?

(A) The money saved in the tax-free savings accounts will be deposited primarily in those banks and financial institutions that supported the legislation instituting the plan.

(B) The majority of people choosing to take advantage of the tax-free savings accounts will withdraw their money prior to age sixty-five.

(C) A significant number of the citizens of Levaska will invest in the tax-free savings accounts well before they reach the age of sixty-five.

(D) During the ten years prior to implementation of the plan, Levaskans deposited an increasingly smaller percentage of their annual income in long-term savings accounts.

(E) People who are not citizens of Levaska are not eligible to invest in the tax-free savings accounts, even if their income is taxable in Levaska.

题干译文：

为了提高居民的长期存款量，政府决定实行一个计划，此计划允许投资者在一个特殊账户里每年存至多1000刀而不用交利息税。但65岁之前不可以取钱，否则罚交之前所有利息的税。

问题：

方案推理——加强

方案：推出 65岁前不取钱就可免税的账户

目的：提高居民长期存款量

思考方向（削弱）——方案本身有没有问题；采取了方案能不能达到目的；方案本身有没有坏处

选项解析：

A. 存在免税账户的钱将会首先存在那些支持此计划的银行或金融机构里：不管钱存在哪里，按理说只要存了就可以提高长期存款量。所以此选项和我们的方案目标无关。

B. 大部分选择此免税账户的人会在65岁之前取钱：如果大家在65岁之前就取了，那么政府想要提高长期存款量的目标就达不到了。此选项起到了削弱的作用。

C. 正确。相当一部分居民会在65岁之前选择这个免税账户：取非之后——没什么人会在65岁之前选择这个账户。如果没人理这个计划，那么政府只能唱独角戏，想要提高长期存款量的目标就达不到了。此选项取非之后达到了削弱的作用。

D. 实施此计划的前十年间，居民分出更少的收入存于长期存款账户：十年前的情况怎么样，和我们现在这个方案是无关的。

E. 非居民的人没有资格投资此免税账户，即使他们的收入是要纳税的：我们的目标是提高“居民”的长期存款量，那讨论“非居民”的情况是没有意义的。

The economy around Lake Paqua depends on fishing of the lake's landlocked salmon population. In recent years, scarcity of food for salmon there has caused a decline in both the number and the size of the adult salmon in the lake. As a result, the region's revenues from salmon fishing have declined significantly. To remedy this situation, officials plan to introduce shrimp, which can serve as a food source for adult salmon, into Lake Paqua.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the plan's chances for success?

(A) Salmon is not a popular food among residents of the Lake Paqua region.

(B) Tourists coming to fish for sport generate more income for residents of the Lake Paqua region than does commercial fishing.

(C) The shrimp to be introduced into Lake Paqua are of a variety that is too small to be harvested for human consumption.

(D) The primary food for both shrimp and juvenile salmon is plankton, which is not abundant in Lake Paqua.

(E) Fishing regulations prohibit people from keeping any salmon they have caught in Lake Paqua that are smaller than a certain minimum size.

题干译文：

Lake Paqua依靠捕捞三文鱼为经济来源。但是，现在的成年三文鱼无论是从重量上还是数量上都有所下降，主要的原因是食物的匮乏。因此，为了解决这个情况，政府决定引入成年三文鱼爱吃的虾。

问题：

方案推理——削弱

方案：引入虾

目标：解决现在的问题（即，让三文鱼变大变多）

思考方向——方案本身有没有问题；采取了方案能不能达到目的；方案本身有没有坏处

选项解析：

A. 在Lake Paqua地区的居民看来，三文鱼并不是一种受欢迎的食物：三文鱼收不收欢迎，与引入虾究竟能不能解决问题无关。

B. Lake Paqua地区的居民通过钓鱼运动带来的收入比商业捕鱼来的多：收入来源的比较，与引入虾究竟能不能解决问题无关。

C. 被引入的虾太小了以至于不会被人类所捕食：我们讨论的是虾能不能让鱼吃掉之后变大变多，跟人会不会吃没有关系。

D. 正确。虾和青年三文鱼的主要食物都是湖里的蜉蝣，而蜉蝣并不是很多：如果此选项成立，那么青年三文鱼会和虾争夺食物，如此一来，纵然成年三文鱼的数量和大小都会上升，但是不可持续发展。质疑了方案成功的可能性。

E. 捕鱼规定要求人们不能带走比一个特定最小值更小的三文鱼：规定被捕鱼的尺寸大小，与引入虾究竟能不能解决问题无关。

In the nation of Partoria, large trucks currently have a much higher rate of traffic accidents per mile driven than other vehicles do. However, the very largest trucks—those with three trailers—had less than a third of the accident rate of single- and double-trailer trucks. Clearly, therefore, one way for Partoria to reduce the number of traffic accidents would be to require shippers to increase their use of triple-trailer trucks.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Partorian trucking companies currently use triple-trailer trucks only for long trips using major highways, which is the safest kind of trip for large trucks.

(B) No matter what changes Partoria makes in the regulation of trucking, it will have to keep some smaller roads off-limits to all large trucks.

(C) Increased use of triple-trailer trucks would mean that large trucks would account for a smaller proportion of all miles driven on Partoria’s roads than they currently do.

(D) In Partoria, the safety record of the trucking industry as a whole has improved slightly over the past ten years.

(E) The volume of truck traffic on Partoria’s highways could be reduced by encouraging shippers to use rail transport whenever possible.

题干译文：

常识是不对的，最大的卡车反而是最安全的。数据表明，三个车厢的卡车在事故率上反而比一个或者两个车厢的卡车更低，因此，为了减少事故率，还是用三个车厢的卡车吧。

问题：

传统问法——削弱

思考方向——即使鼓励所有司机使用三节车厢的卡车，也不见得会减少事故率

选项解析：

A. 正确。Partoria的卡车公司目前都将三厢卡车派往最安全的公路上行驶：此选项说明之前事故率低并不是因为三节车厢卡车安全，而是因为路安全。所以我们即使鼓励所有司机使用三节车厢的卡车，也不见得会减少事故率。

B. 无论Partoria对卡车的限制如何变化，Partoria仍然会禁止大型卡车通过一些较小的路：我们讨论的是安全问题，与什么样的车能不能通过什么样的路无关。

C. 更多三节车厢卡车的使用意味着大卡车将占比更低：与安全问题无关。

D. 在Partoria，卡车工业的安全记录在过去十年中上升了：此选项描述整个卡车工业的安全性的变化，那我们是无法判断其中的三厢卡车是不是更安全的。

E. 鼓励铁路运输可以减少卡车交通量：与安全问题无关。

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. At the beginning of the half-hour slot a substantial portion of the viewing public had tuned in to that station. Clearly, then, many more people are interested in lengthy televised political messages than was previously thought.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) The candidate who produced the half-hour-long advertisement did not win election at the polls.

(B) The half-hour-long advertisement was widely publicized before it was broadcast.

(C) The half-hour-long advertisement was aired during a time slot normally taken by one of the most popular prime-time shows.

(D) Most short political advertisements are aired during a wide range of programs in order to reach a broad spectrum of viewers.

(E) In general a regular-length television program that features debate about current political issues depends for its appeal on the personal qualities of the program's moderator.

题干译文：

大家通常都不喜欢看长广告，所以大部分政治广告像商业广告一样很短。但是最近有一个候选者播出了个半小时长的长广告。在这个广告开始的时候，有很多人将台调进了这个频道。因此，人们比之前更喜欢长的政治广告。

问题：

传统文法——削弱

思考方向——人们并不见得比之前更喜欢长的政治广告。

选项解析：

A. 播出半小时广告的候选者没有赢得选举：选举结果与大家喜不喜欢此政治广告无关。

B. 在这条广告播放之前，此广告已经被众所周知了：如果此选项成立，说明大家在知道要播此广告的前提下还调到了这个台，反而说明大家或许真的喜欢长的政治广告，加强了结论，

C. 正确。这个半小时广告是在一个原本播放最受欢迎表演的时段播出的：本选项可以解释为何观众在广告的开始要调到这个频道——大家误以为还是会播放表演，所以换到这个电视台，并不见得是为了这个长政治广告来的，由此削弱了结论。

D. 大部分的政治短广告都插播在许多种节目之中，这样做的目的是抓到尽量多的受众：我们讨论的是长广告，与短广告无关。

E. 讨论当今政治话题的正常长度广告取决于节目主持人的个人品质：我们讨论的是长广告，与正常长度广告无关。

Early in the twentieth century, Lake Konfa became very polluted. Recently fish populations have recovered as release of industrial pollutants has declined and the lake’s waters have become cleaner. Fears are now being voiced that the planned construction of an oil pipeline across the lake’s bottom might revive pollution and cause the fish population to decline again. However, a technology for preventing leaks is being installed. Therefore, provided this technology is effective, those fears are groundless.

The argument depends on assuming which of the following?

(A) Apart from development related to the pipeline, there will be no new industrial development around the lake that will create renewed pollution in its waters.

(B) There is no reason to believe that the leak-preventing technology would be ineffective when installed in the pipeline in Lake Konfa.

(C) The bottom of the lake does not contain toxic remnants of earlier pollution that will be stirred into the water by pipeline construction.

(D) Damage to the lake’s fish populations would be the only harm that a leak of oil from the pipeline would cause.

(E) The species of fish that are present in Lake Konfa now are the same as those that were in the lake before it was affected by pollution.

题干译文：

Konfa湖曾经被污染的很严重，现在被治理的很好。但是，最近政府打算在Konfa湖的湖底安装一条输油管道。有些人担心安装输油管道可能会导致湖水再次被污染、鱼的数量再次下降。但是，有一个防漏技术可以被采用。因此，只要此防止漏油的技术有效，那么这些担心就是多余的。

问题：

传统文法——假设

思考方向（削弱）—— 即使这个防漏技术有效，我们还是需要担心。

选项解析：

A. 除了此油管，没有别的工业发展会污染水：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——除了此油管，还有别的工业发展会污染水。我们现在担心的是建立“这个”油管，与别的污染源没有关系。

B. 我们没有理由相信，这个防漏技术是没有效果的：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——我们有理由相信，这个防漏技术是没有效果的。我们得出结论的前提条件就是“即使这个防漏技术有效”，那么此选项取非后把得出结论的条件都否定了，这是不可以的。我们要否定的是结论，而不是前提。

C. 正确。湖底没有包含一些早期的、会在安装油管时翻出来的污染物：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——湖底包含了一些早期的、会在安装油管时翻出来的污染物。选项取非后，告诉我们即使防漏技术有效，但会在安装油管的过程中释放有毒物，那么我们还是需要担心建立此油管到底O不OK。

D. 对鱼群数量的伤害将会是漏油造成的唯一伤害：具体的伤害“有哪些”与我们担心“有没有”伤害无关。

E. 现存于湖中的鱼类与污染前湖里的鱼类一样：鱼的种类与我们的担心无关。

The government has warned of possible travel disruptions this winter because the primary chemical used to keep airport runways free of snow and ice is scarce. There are effective alternative chemicals. However, they are environmentally hazardous and thus require special exemptions from the ban on their use. So if the government issued such exemptions to cold-weather airports, travelers would not have to face the warned-of travel disruptions.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) There will be a sufficient amount of the alternative chemicals to supply all the airports that need them.

(B) The number of winter storms bringing snow and ice this winter is forecast to be no greater than normal.

(C) The government has an established policy of issuing exemptions from the alternative-chemical ban when the primary chemical is scarce.

(D) The supply of regularly used chemicals that was available before this winter's shortage has been enough to keep flights moving in past winters.

(E) If disruptions of flights occur during the winter in question, they will not be caused by a lack of the chemicals used to keep runways free of snow and ice.

题干译文：

这个冬天，政府给出了旅游警告：用于机场除冰除雪的原始化学剂告急。虽然有别的化学剂替代品，但这些替代品是有害的，所以需要政府特别批准才能使用它们，因此，如果政府可以批准这些化学剂的使用，游客们就不用担心旅游警告了。

问题：

传统问法——假设

思考方向（削弱）——即使政府特批了，游客们也有可能继续担心旅游警告。

选项解析：

A. 正确。这里有足够的化学剂替代品供应机场：选项取非后——这里没有足够的化学剂替代品供应机场。如果替代品也不够用，机场还是会面临无法除冰除雪的问题，那么即使政府特批了，我们也不能轻易解除旅游警告。

B. 这个冬天带来冰雪的风暴数量不会比往年更多：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——这个冬天带来冰雪的风暴数量会比往年更多。按文章思路来说，无论和去年比，风暴数量、冰雪数量更多还是更少，只要我们的化学剂够用，就可以解除旅游警告。

C. 针对原始化学剂告急时解除替代化学剂的禁令，政府制定了相关政策：政府有没有制定相关政策，是在条件句里（即使政府特批了）讨论的事情，与结论无关。

D. 此次短缺前原始化学剂的供应量是足够应付前几个冬天的机场的：前几个冬天的情况与现在出现短缺后的情况无关。

E. 如果旅游警告出现了，它们并不是由化学剂的缺乏引起的：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——如果旅游警告出现了，它们是由化学剂的缺乏引起的。取非后的选项把文章的背景信息重新说了一遍，像复读机一样重复背景信息是无法对结论起到任何作用的。

Personnel officer: The exorbitant cost of our health-insurance benefits reflects the high dollar amount of medical expenses incurred by our employees. Employees who are out of shape, as a group, have higher doctor bills and longer hospital stays than do their colleagues who are fit. Therefore, since we must reduce our health-insurance costs, we should offer a rigorous fitness program of jogging and weight lifting to all employees, and require employees who are out of shape to participate.

Which of the following, if true, provides the most support for the personnel officer's proposal?

(A) The medical expenses incurred by fit people who participate in a program of jogging and weight lifting are less than those incurred by fit people who do not participate in such a program.

(B) More otherwise fit people are injured by participating in rigorous jogging and weight-lifting programs than are injured by participating in moderate jogging and weight-lifting programs.

(C) The likelihood of incurring medical expenses is slightly greater for people who participate in fitness programs offered by their employers than it is for people who participate in programs offered commercially.

(D) Moderate fitness programs increase the average person's fitness to the same extent that rigorous fitness programs do.

(E) More health problems and injuries are the result of mandatory participation in a fitness program than are the result of voluntary participation.

题干译文：

员工健康保险福利的成本很高表明了员工们在医疗上的花费很高。那些过胖的雇员比一般的雇员在医药费和住院时间上都多。因此，为了减少医疗成本，我们应该给所有雇员提供一个慢跑减重的项目，并要求过胖的雇员参与。

问题：

方案推理——加强

方案：给所有雇员提供一个慢跑减重的项目，并要求过胖的雇员参与

目标：减少医疗成本

思考方向（削弱）——方案本身有没有问题；采取了方案能不能达到目的；方案本身有没有坏处。

选项解析：

A. 正确。参加慢跑活动的健康人的医疗花费要比不参加慢跑活动的健康人的医疗花费要低：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——参加慢跑的健康人医疗花费比不参加的人要高，那么慢跑这个方案显然不一定能达成“减少医疗花费”这个目标。因为纵然胖人确实减少了花费，但是健康人增加了花费，有悖于我们“减少医疗成本”这个目标。

B. 更多参加严格的慢跑活动的健康人比参加温和一些的慢跑活动的人受伤：受伤数量的多少不等于最终医疗花费的多少，所以这个选项中的比较是没有意义的。

C. 被雇主提供而参加慢跑项目的健康人员涉及到的医疗花费比可能比被推销（commercially）而参加慢跑项目的健康人员要高：无论被雇主提供慢跑项目的人是否会比自己报的人花更多的钱，只要比不参加花费低，那么该项目就可以达到目标。

D. 温和的慢跑项目和严格的慢跑项目在提升人们健康的效果上是一样的：本选项描述的是温和的项目与严格的项目（题目中的方案）之间效果相同，与我们究竟能不能通过文中的方案减少医疗成本无关。

E. 强制的健身项目比自愿的健身项目更容易受伤：强制与自愿的比较，是不能帮我们判断强制的方案能不能降低医疗成本的。

Newspaper editorial:

In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor's ultimate goal, since after being released from prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.

(B) Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.

(C) The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.

(D) Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate's subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.

(E) The governor's ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

题干译文：

为了减少犯罪率，议员决定把监狱的环境弄的艰苦一些。一种艰苦的方式就是取消监狱中的大学等级课程。然而，这个行为却违背了初衷，因为凡是上过大学等级课程的人出去之后犯罪率都比较低。

问题：

传统问法——假设

思考方向（削弱）—— 这个举措（取消课程）不见得会违背初衷

选项解析：

A. 在监狱服刑期间没有能力去参加大学等级课程的学习不会阻止任何人犯其本来要犯的罪：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——在监狱服刑期间没有能力去参加大学等级课程的学习会阻止任何人犯其本来要犯的罪。这个选项只讨论了不参加课程对“本来打算要犯罪的人”的影响，没有考虑对“本来不打算犯罪”的人的影响。

B. 有前科的人不会比一般的民众更容易犯罪：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——有前科的人会比一般的民众更容易犯罪。我们要比较的是罪犯上课和不上课对再次犯罪的影响，将罪犯整体与大众对比是没有意义的。

C. 正确。选择上大学等级课程的罪犯不是本身就已经更加不可能在出狱后犯罪的人：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——选择上大学等级课程的罪犯本身就已经更加不可能在出狱后犯罪。如果选择上课的人本身就不会再犯，那无论他们上不上课都更不容易再犯罪。因此，会不会再犯罪和上课就没有因果关系，取消课程也不见得会违背初衷。

D. 上高中等级的课程对于在监狱中罪犯的影响不如上大学等级课程的影响：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——上高中等级的课程对于在监狱中罪犯的影响比上大学等级课程的影响大。我们讨论的是“取消”课程带来的后果，与课程“本身”是什么样的无关。

E. 政府最终的目的是通过说服人们相信对于犯罪已经做了些有效的事情来增加名气：政府的目的是什么与我们讨论无关。

10.

Research shows that over half of all morning political talk shows on the major television networks do not include any women broadcasters, and in terms of total guest appearances on these shows, women represent just 14 percent of the guests. Why does this research matter? These shows are a critical forum for our nation's political debates. They have an agenda-setting effect, in that they tend to influence the priorities of citizens across the country. The relative lack of women on these shows results in women's issues being a lower political priority for most citizens.

The argument above relies on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Most of the nation's citizens watch morning news talk shows.

(B) Morning news talk shows exhibit greater gender disparities than other news programs.

(D) News talk shows are the primary mechanism that shapes the nation’s political debates.

(E) Hosts and guests of news talk shows are more likely to raise issues that are pertinent specifically to their own gender.

题干译文：

研究表明，电视上超过一半的早间政治talk show不包含女性播报员。并且，这些talk show的观众中，女性只占14%。为什么这个研究很重要呢？这些show是我国政治讨论的一个重要平台，会影响我们居民的（政治问题）优先级。那么，这些show上缺少女性的现象会导致和女性相关的问题在大部分居民当中处于较低的政治优先级。（说人话就是：节目当中女性的缺乏会导致大部分居民不重视女性相关的政治问题）

问题：

传统问法——假设

思考方向（削弱）——“节目缺乏女性” 不一定= “对于大部分居民来说，女性相关的政治问题处于较低的优先级”

选项解析：

A. 大部分居民都看早间新闻：公民看不看这个新闻，与“缺乏女性”会不会导致“女性优先级低”没有关系。

B. 早间新闻比其他节目展示更大的性别不平等：早间新闻和别的节目的对比，与“缺乏女性”会不会导致“女性优先级低”没有关系。

C. 对于不关注女性问题的人来说，女性问题不会成为他们的优先级：鉴于此选项是否定句，我们可以取非——对于不关注女性问题的人来说，女性问题会成为他们的优先级。结论讨论的是“对于most citizens”，但我们并不知道不关注女性问题的人占多少，所以此选项取非后无法削弱结论。

D. 新闻talk show是修正政治讨论的主要机制：本选项讨论的是talk show的一个性质，与“缺乏女性”会不会导致“女性优先级低”没有关系。

E. 正确。主持人和观众更有可能提出和自身性别相关的问题：本选项取非——主持人和观众不太有可能提出和自身性别相关的问题。如果主持人和观众不讨论和自身性别相关的问题，那么即使男性占大多数，女性问题也是有很大几率被讨论的，取非后起到了削弱结论的作用。