扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2016-CR-17
The Maxilux car company's design for its new luxury model, the Max 100, included a special design for the tires that was intended to complement the model's image. The winning bid for supplying these tires was submitted by Rubco. Analysts concluded that the bid would only just cover Rubco's costs on the tires, but Rubco executives claim that winning the bid will actually make a profit for the company.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly justifies the claim made by Rubco's executives?
In any Maxilux model, the spare tire is exactly the same make and model as the tires that are mounted on the wheels.
Rubco holds exclusive contracts to supply Maxilux with the tires for a number of other models made by Maxilux.
The production facilities for the Max 100 and those for the tires to be supplied by Rubco are located very near each other.
When people who have purchased a carefully designed luxury automobile need to replace a worn part of it, they almost invariably replace it with a part of exactly the same make and type.
When Maxilux awarded the tire contract to Rubco, the only criterion on which Rubco's bid was clearly ahead of its competitors' bids was price.
情景：Maxilux汽车公司的新车型M100的设计中包含了一款针对其轮胎的特殊设计。通过招标，Ruboo公司成为了这种轮胎的供应商。分析人士认为中标的价格仅仅只够Ruboo公司生产轮胎的成本，但Ruboo公司的高管认为生产这种轮胎可以带来利润。
推理：本题是一个“现象解释型考题”。按照正常逻辑来说，即，结论应该为：Ruboo公司生产这种轮胎不能带来利润。由于结论句和前提句说的是两件事，并且结论为果，所以本题为因果推理。
顺序的因果逻辑：因为中标的价格仅仅只够Ruboo公司生产轮胎的成本，所以Ruboo公司生产这种轮胎不能带来利润
（因）前提：中标的价格仅仅只够Ruboo公司生产轮胎的成本
（果）结论：Ruboo公司生产这种轮胎不能带来利润
选题方式：因果推理只有一个评估方向，简而言之，即，反驳推理文段中的结论。
选项分析：
A选项：在Maxilux公司的所有车型中，备胎和原装轮胎都是完全一致的。本选项和利润无关，不能反驳结论。
B选项：Rubco公司持有了很多给Maxilux公司其它车型提供轮胎的独家订单。本题的结论说的是“Ruboo公司生产这种轮胎不能带来利润”，所以Rubco是否持有别的订单和结论句无关。
C选项：M100的生产设备与轮胎的生产设备离得很近。本选项和利润无关，不能反驳结论。
D选项： Correct. 当人们需要替换轮胎时，只能去替换完全一样的质地和型号的轮胎。如果大家在更换轮胎时必须到原厂家去更换，则会给公司带来商机与利润。
E选项：Rubco公司的标书比其他公司的标书唯一的优点在于价格。本选项和利润无关，不能反驳结论。
这题的难点主要在看懂题目。。。。。以及问题，其实我感觉逻辑推理不需要那么多公式化流程化的知识点，只要了解题型，看懂题目以及答案，用常识推理一下即可
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论