扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2016-CR-34
Thyrian lawmaker: Thyria's Cheese Importation Board inspects all cheese shipments to Thyria and rejects shipments not meeting specified standards. Yet only 1 percent is ever rejected. Therefore, since the health consequences and associated economic costs of not rejecting that 1 percent are negligible, whereas the board's operating costs are considerable, for economic reasons alone the board should be disbanded.
Consultant: I disagree. The threat of having their shipments rejected deters many cheese exporters from shipping substandard product.
The consultant responds to the lawmaker's argument by_____.
rejecting the lawmaker's argument while proposing that the standards according to which the board inspects imported cheese should be raised
providing evidence that the lawmaker's argument has significantly overestimated the cost of maintaining the board
objecting to the lawmaker's introducing into the discussion factors that are not strictly economic
pointing out a benefit of maintaining the board, which the lawmaker's argument has failed to consider
shifting the discussion from the argument at hand to an attack on the integrity of the cheese inspectors
情景：Cheese Importation Board真是没用啊，自己的成本不能忽略，但是可见的收益却可以忽略。顾问说：不赞成。正是害怕被拒，才阻止了很多出口商运送不符合标准的奶酪。
推理：本题为因果推理。顺序的因果逻辑：因为不拒绝1%的奶酪所带来的健康结果和成本都可以忽略，但是维持Cheese Importation Board这个机构的成本是不可以忽略的，所以Cheese Importation Board这个机构的成本大于收益
（果）结论：Cheese Importation Board这个机构的成本大于收益
选题方式：顾问从一个反驳结论的角度削弱了推理文段。
选项分析：（由于分析比较简单，此处只翻译选项）：
A选项：反对立法者，并提出进口奶酪的标准应该提高
B选项：提供证明立法者高估了CIB的运作成本的证据
C选项：反对立法者引入非经济问题的讨论
D选项： Correct. 指出CIB的好处，这些好处被立法者所忽略的
E选项：把话题转向对奶酪检查员廉正作风的批判
为什么不是统计枚举呢？样本是只考虑了经济影响
1.53/错选A选项：文章并没有提出更高的标准，事实上，consultant认为标准没问题，要保持
按方案做的
这道题太绕了。读完题目想着答案怎么也应该是，respond by 举出对方提案会带来的更大的危害，来反证自己的好。结果答案选了D，直接说明自己的好。不过确实别的都错的太离谱了。
因果推理喔。