Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best candidates to the job. The legislature's move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.
Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.
Pat's response to Mel is inadequate in that it
attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change.
attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects.
simply denies Mel's claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial .
assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.
M的意思是,最优秀的法官不来做这个工作,是因为讲座和授课都不能收钱,而P是说很少有法官会上课or讲座,但是P基于的是现在的法官,而不是the best candidates
这就好像说:M认为中国国足吸引不了优秀人才,涨工资解决不了问题因为不让拍广告。P说了:咱们的球员根本没人拍广告。P的问题就在于:目前的球员本来就能力差没人找他们拍广告,可牛逼的球员广告费代言费是很多的,不让拍广告人家就不来踢足球了->from KMF
我觉得C错的原因是只说了ban没有负面影响,而他说的是涨工资有正面影响,涨工资和ban是两个东西
P 不是啊涨工资能吸引到优秀人才 因为现在演讲的人很少 禁止演讲不会影响吸引最优秀的人才
P有毛病
E 假定对大部分成员有益的变化将对所有成员都有益。P并没有对有益的涨工资部分进行反驳,而是对有害的禁令进行了反驳,所以不对。
P就说涨薪能解决问题的,因为很少有法官去授课。
问P的说法有哪方面的不足。
A P是基于现在的情况来做的预估。 现在没法官出去授课,是因为现在就禁止有偿上课啊。it was coupled with a ban ...
B 因果搞反了。这里没说到因果,说的是某一个方案有没有效果。
C 因为支出了没有副作用,所以方案有用。
D 只是反对M的说法,没给出论据。给出理由了。
E 对大多数人有用就是对所有人有用。没提到。
best candidate是想要吸引的,也就是potential member(judges)
现在的judges因为没有加薪,所以没有达到理想的状态,是current one
P说的current ones不做讲座不代表加薪了以后吸引过来的best candidates也不做讲座
M说因为工资低吸引不来优秀的人才(要注意这里的优秀人才是指潜在的,未来可能会进入法官行业的人,但并不是现在以在从事这个行业的人)且政府即使提高了工资,也不会有多大作用,因为会禁止法官们考演讲和授课赚钱
P反驳说,提高工资会有用,因为现在的法官很少会去通过演讲和教课赚钱,所以这个ban无效
P的话有漏洞是因为他在已现在的法官不会去演讲和教课来推断潜在的那些优秀人才,未来法官也不会这样干,所以这点是不对的
attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects.
【 a positive effect】:Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation.
【pointing to the absence of negative effects】:Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.
P:因为很少有法官去外面教课,做演讲,所以禁止他们外出演讲授课不会有不好的影响
A:providing evidence about its effect on the current members.就是指现在又很少的法出去授课演讲
B:把changes的原因当成了它的effects,错误,pal的言论是关于ban的,ban的原因根本没提到
C:说没有不好的影响就是有好的影响,错误,原文没有提到好的影响,只说了没有不好的影响
D:没有给出证据,错误,原文说了是观点+evidence
E:没有提到关于 the most able members,排除
B 错误的把改变的原因当成改变的影响,文中没提到,排除
C 靠不提到消极影响来认为某个改变有积极影响,文中没提到,排除
D 直接反驳M的话且不提供证据,P说现在的法官几乎不教课就是证据,故排除D
E 假设对大多数人有效的改变对所有人都有效,混淆选项,一定要注意这个政策是对潜在的竞争者所制定的,和已经进入法官这个职业的人无关