ONCLUSION; THEY FORM THE FOUNDATION OR INFRASTRUCTURE UPON WHICH THE CONCLUS
ION DEPENDS. TO DETERMINE WHETHER A STATEMENT IS A PREMISE, ASK YOURSELF WHE
THER IT SUPPORTS THE CONCLUSION. IF SO, IT’S A PREMISE. EARLIER WE SAW THAT
WRITERS USE CERTAIN WORDS TO FLAG CONCLUSIONS; LIKEWISE WRITERS USE CERTAIN
WORDS TO FLAG PREMISES. FOLLOWING IS A PARTIAL LIST OF THE MOST COMMON PREMI
SE INDICATORS:
PREMISE INDICATORS
BECAUSE FOR
SINCE IS EVIDENCE THAT
IF IN THAT
AS OWING TO
SUPPOSE INASMUCH AS
ASSUME MAY BE DERIVED FROM
EXAMPLE:
SINCE THE INCUMBENT’S VIEWS ARE OUT OF STEP WITH PUBLIC OPINION, HE PROBABLY
WILL NOT BE REELECTED.
HERE "SINCE" IS USED TO FLAG THE PREMISE THAT THE INCUMBENT’S POSITIONS ARE
UNPOPULAR.
SUPPRESSED PREMISES
MOST ARGUMENTS DEPEND ON ONE OR MORE UNSTATED PREMISES. SOMETIMES THIS INDIC
ATES A WEAKNESS IN THE ARGUMENT, AN OVERSIGHT BY THE WRITER. MORE OFTEN, HOW
EVER, CERTAIN PREMISES ARE LEFT TACIT BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO NUMEROUS, OR THE
WRITER ASSUMES THAT HIS AUDIENCE IS AWARE OF THE ASSUMPTIONS, OR HE WANTS TH
E AUDIENCE TO FILL IN THE PREMISE THEMSELVES AND THEREFORE BE MORE LIKELY TO
BELIEVE THE CONCLUSION.
EXAMPLE:
CONCLUSION: I KNEW HE DID IT.
PREMISE: ONLY A GUILTY PERSON WOULD ACCEPT IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION.
THE SUPPRESSED PREMISE IS THAT HE DID, IN FACT, ACCEPT IMMUNITY. THE SPEAKER
ASSUMES THAT HIS AUDIENCE IS AWARE OF THIS FACT OR AT LEAST IS WILLING TO B
ELIEVE IT, SO TO STATE IT WOULD BE REDUNDANT AND PONDEROUS. IF THE UNSTATED
PREMISE WERE FALSE (THAT IS, HE DID NOT ACCEPT IMMUNITY), THE ARGUMENT WOULD
NOT TECHNICALLY BE A LIE; BUT IT WOULD BE VERY DECEPTIVE. THE UNSCRUPULOUS
WRITER MAY USE THIS PLOY IF HE THINKS THAT HE CAN GET AWAY WITH IT. THAT IS,
HIS ARGUMENT HAS THE INTENDED EFFECT AND THE FALSE PREMISE, THOUGH IMPLICIT
, IS HARD TO FIND OR IS AMBIGUOUS. POLITICIANS ARE NOT AT ALL ABOVE USING TH
IS TACTIC.
A COMMON QUESTION ON THE GMAT ASKS YOU TO FIND THE SUPPRESSED PREMISE OF AN
ARGUMENT. FINDING THE SUPPRESSED PREMISE, OR ASSUMPTION, OF AN ARGUMENT CAN
BE DIFFICULT. HOWEVER, ON THE GMAT YOU HAVE AN ADVANTAGE--THE SUPPRESSED PRE
MISE IS LISTED AS ONE OF THE FIVE ANSWER-CHOICES. TO TEST WHETHER AN ANSWER-
CHOICE IS A SUPPRESSED PREMISE, ASK YOURSELF WHETHER IT WOULD MAKE THE ARGUM
ENT MORE PLAUSIBLE. IF SO, THEN IT IS VERY LIKELY A SUPPRESSED PREMISE.
EXAMPLE:
AMERICAN ATTITUDES TEND TO BE RATHER INSULAR, BUT THERE IS MUCH WE CAN LEARN
FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. IN JAPAN, FOR EXAMPLE, WORKERS SET ASIDE SOME TIME EA
CH DAY TO EXERCISE, AND MANY CORPORATIONS PROVIDE ELABORATE EXERCISE FACILIT
IES FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES. FEW AMERICAN CORPORATIONS HAVE SUCH EXERCISE PROGRA
MS. STUDIES HAVE SHOWN THAT THE JAPANESE WORKER IS MORE PRODUCTIVE THAN THE
AMERICAN WORKER. THUS IT MUST BE CONCLUDED THAT THE PRODUCTIVITY OF AMERICAN
WORKERS WILL LAG BEHIND THEIR JAPANESE COUNTERPARTS, UNTIL MANDATORY EXERCI
SE PROGRAMS ARE INTRODUCED.
THE CONCLUSION OF THE ARGUMENT IS VALID IF WHICH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING IS ASS
UMED?
(A) EVEN IF EXERCISE PROGRAMS DO NOT INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY, THEY WILL IMPROV
E THE AMERICAN WORKER’S HEALTH.
(B) THE PRODUCTIVITY OF ALL WORKERS CAN BE INCREASED BY EXERCISE.
(C) EXERCISE IS AN ESSENTIAL FACTOR IN THE JAPANESE WORKER’S SUPERIOR PRODUC
TIVITY.
(D) AMERICAN WORKERS CAN ADAPT TO THE LONGER JAPANESE WORK WEEK.
(E) AMERICAN CORPORATIONS DON’T HAVE THE FUNDS TO BUILD ELABORATE EXERCISE F
ACILITIES.
THE UNSTATED ESSENCE OF THE ARGUMENT IS THAT EXERCISE IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF
PRODUCTIVITY AND THAT JAPANESE WORKERS ARE MORE PRODUCTIVE THAN AMERICAN WO
RKERS BECAUSE THEY EXERCISE MORE. THE ANSWER IS (C).
COUNTER-PREMISES
WHEN PRESENTING A POSITION, YOU OBVIOUSLY DON’T WANT TO ARGUE AGAINST YOURSE
LF. HOWEVER, IT IS OFTEN EFFECTIVE TO CONCEDE CERTAIN MINOR POINTS THAT WEAK
EN YOUR ARGUMENT. THIS SHOWS THAT YOU ARE OPEN-MINDED AND THAT YOUR IDEAS AR
E WELL CONSIDERED. IT ALSO DISARMS POTENTIAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST YOUR POSITION
.. FOR INSTANCE, IN ARGUING FOR A STRONG, AGGRESSIVE POLICE DEPARTMENT, YOU M
AY CONCEDE THAT IN THE PAST THE POLICE HAVE AT TIMES ACTED TOO AGGRESSIVELY.
OF COURSE, YOU WILL THEN NEED TO STATE MORE CONVINCING REASONS TO SUPPORT Y
OUR POSITION.
EXAMPLE:
I SUBMIT THAT THE STRIKERS SHOULD ACCEPT THE MANAGEMENT’S OFFER. ADMITTEDLY,
IT IS LESS THAN WHAT WAS DEMANDED. BUT IT DOES RESOLVE THE MAIN GRIEVANCE--
INADEQUATE HEALTH CARE. FURTHERMORE, AN INDEPENDENT STUDY SHOWS THAT A WAGE
INCREASE GREATER THAN 5% WOULD LEAVE THE COMPANY UNABLE TO COMPETE AGAINST J
APAN AND GERMANY, FORCING ITSINTOSBANKRUPTCY.
THE CONCLUSION, "THE STRIKERS SHOULD ACCEPT THE MANAGEMENT’S OFFER," IS STAT
ED IN THE FIRST SENTENCE. THEN "ADMITTEDLY" INTRODUCES A CONCESSION; NAMELY,
THAT THE OFFER WAS LESS THAN WHAT WAS DEMANDED. THIS WEAKENS THE SPEAKER’S
CASE, BUT IT ADDRESSES A POTENTIAL CRITICISM OF HIS POSITION BEFORE IT CAN B
E MADE. THE LAST TWO SENTENCES OF THE ARGUMENT PRESENT MORE COMPELLING REASO
NS TO ACCEPT THE OFFER AND FORM THE GIST OF THE ARGUMENT.
FOLLOWING ARE SOME OF THE MOST COMMON COUNTER-PREMISE INDICATORS:
COUNTER-PREMISE INDICATORS
BUT DESPITE
ADMITTEDLY EXCEPT
EVEN THOUGH NONETHELESS
NEVERTHELESS ALTHOUGH
HOWEVER IN SPITE OF THE FACT
AS YOU MAY HAVE ANTICIPATED, THE GMAT WRITERS SOMETIMES USE COUNTER-PREMISES
TO BAIT WRONG ANSWER-CHOICES. ANSWER-CHOICES THAT REFER TO COUNTER-PREMISES
ARE VERY TEMPTING BECAUSE THEY REFER DIRECTLY TO THE PASSAGE AND THEY ARE I
N PART TRUE. BUT YOU MUST ASK YOURSELF "IS THIS THE MAIN POINT THAT THE AUTH
OR IS TRYING TO MAKE?" IT MAY MERELY BE A MINOR CONCESSION.
LOGIC II (DIAGRAMMING)
责任编辑：sealion1986
