Fast-food restaurants make up 45 percent of all restaurants in Canatria. Customers at these restaurants tend to be young; in fact, studies have shown that the older people get, the less likely they are to eat in fast-food restaurants. Since the average age of the Canatrian population is gradually rising and will continue to do so, the number of fast-food restaurants is likely to decrease.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
Fast-food restaurants in Canatria are getting bigger, so each one can serve more customers.
Some older people eat at fast-food restaurants more frequently than the average young person.
Many people who rarely eat in fast-food restaurants nevertheless eat regularly in restaurants.
The overall population of Canatria is growing steadily.
As the population of Canatria gets older, more people are eating at home.
情景:快餐在Canatria这个地方占据45%的份额。研究表明,越老的人越不爱吃快餐。因为Canatria地区人口老龄化,所以快餐店的数量会下降。
推理:本题为因果推理。顺序的因果逻辑:因为越老的人越不爱吃快餐且Canatria地区人口老龄化,所以快餐店的数量会下降
(因)前提:越老的人越不爱吃快餐且Canatria地区人口老龄化
(果)结论:快餐店的数量会下降
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Canatria的快餐店变大了,因此每个快餐店能服务更多的顾客了。如果每个快餐店能服务更多客户了,那么快餐店的数量就更应该少了,加强了推理文段。
B选项:某些年龄大的人吃快餐的频率比年轻人平均的频率还高。某些年龄大的人的情况并不代表整体人群,所以本选项不能反驳结论。
C选项:很多很少吃快餐的人会规律性的在餐馆吃饭。本选项和推理文段的结论无关。
D选项:Correct. Canatria的整体人口数在上升。如果整体人口变多,那么就算整体人口的平均年龄上升,也有可能会有更多的年轻人,如此让快餐店的数量随之上升。
E选项:因为Canatria的人年龄变大,更多人的选择在家吃饭。如果更多人在家吃饭,那么饭馆的数量就更应该下降了。
Premise1:某行业用户群体为A。Premise2:群体A占总人口比例降低,并且持续。Conclusion:业内公司减少。
Gap:群体A比例降低是否意味着群体A绝对数量降低。
老师,这道题为什么不能理解成为相关因果推理呢
相关因果是A变化,同时B变化,所以A导致B。前提没有提到老年人吃快餐频率低,同时快餐店减少,只说了老年人吃快餐频率低
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
我感觉这个更应该是相关推理吧