Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

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


These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine.

Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction.

Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.

Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.

Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.

加入错题本 分享
纠错
考题讲解

情景：很多人因为对酒中的硫化物的过敏反应苦不堪言。现在好了，有些制酒商可以不向酒中加入硫化物了，那么那些喜欢喝酒但是害怕对硫化物过敏的人可以不用冒着过敏的风险喝酒了。

推理：本题的前提和结论讲的是两件事，并且结论为果，所以为因果推理。

顺序的因果逻辑：因为酒中不会额外添加亚硫酸盐了，所以那些喜欢喝酒但是害怕对亚硫酸盐过敏的人可以不用冒着过敏的风险喝酒了。
（因）前提：酒中不会额外添加亚硫酸盐。
（果）结论：那些喜欢喝酒但是害怕对亚硫酸盐过敏的人可以不用冒着过敏的风险喝酒。

选题方式：因果推理只有一个评估方向，简而言之，即（由于本题问的是假设，所以答案选项需在“取非”后满足），需要反驳推理文段中的结论。

选项分析：

A选项：这些制酒商有能力通过一种不会添加任何可能引起过敏反应的方法来复制添加亚硫酸盐的添加剂效应。本选项讨论的是制酒商有没有办法找到别的方法来给酒保质的问题，和推理文段的结论无关。

B选项：并不是所有的亚硫酸盐都会导致过敏。本选项和推理文段的结论无关。

C选项：酒是唯一的添加亚硫酸盐的饮料。本选项和推理文段的结论无关。

D选项：除了亚硫酸盐之外，酒中没有其他物质会导致过敏。本选项有一些迷惑性。请注意本题的结论，即那些喜欢喝酒但是害怕对亚硫酸盐过敏的人可以不用冒着过敏的风险喝酒。结论中的过敏特指对亚硫酸盐的过敏， 因此，其他的成分就算可以导致喝酒的人过敏，也不是对亚硫酸盐的过敏，因此本选项和结论无关。

E选项：Correct. 这些制酒商产的酒本身不含足够导致过敏的量的亚硫酸盐的。即使酒中不额外添加亚硫酸盐，酒中依然含有亚硫酸盐，因此喝酒的人就依然会过敏。

展开显示

登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论

OG2020-CR
考点