13. Physician: The patient is suffering either from disease X or else from disease Y, but there is no available test for distinguishing X from Y. Therefore, since there is an effective treatment for Y but no treatment for X, we must act on the assumption that the patient has a case of Y.
The physician’s reasoning could be based on which one of the following principles?
(A) In treating a patient who has one or the other of two diseases, it is more important to treat the diseases than to determine which of the two diseases the patient has.
(B) If circumstances beyond a decision maker’s control will affect the outcome of the decision maker’s actions, the decision maker must assume that circumstances are unfavorable.
(C) When the soundness of a strategy depends on the truth of a certain assumption, the first step in putting the strategy into effect must be to test the truth of this assumption.
(D) When success is possible only if a circumstance beyond one’s control is favorable, then one’s strategy must be based on the assumption that this circumstance is in fact favorable.（D）
(E) When only one strategy carries the possibility of success, circumstances must as much as possible be changed to fit this strategy.
14. Consumer advocate: Tropical oils are high in saturated fats, which increase the risk of heart disease. Fortunately, in most prepared food tropical oils can be replaced by healthier alternatives without noticeably affecting taste. Therefore, intensive publicity about the disadvantage of tropical oils will be likely to result in dietary changes that will diminish many people’s risk of developing heart disease.
Nutritionist: The major sources of saturated fat in the average North American diet are meat, poultry, and dairy products, not tropical oils. Thus, focusing attention on the health hazards of tropical oils would be counterproductive, because it would encourage people to believe that more substantial dietary changes are unnecessary.
Which one of the following is a point at issue between the nutritionist and the consumer advocate?
(A) Whether a diet that regularly includes large quantities of tropical oil can increase the risk of heart disease.
(B) Whether intensive publicity campaigns can be effective as means of changing people’s eating habits.
(C) Whether more people in North American would benefit from reducing the amount of meat they consume than would benefit from eliminating tropical oils from their diets.
(D) Whether some people’s diets could be made significantly healthier if they replaced all tropical oils with vegetable oils that are significantly lower in saturated fat.（E）
(E) Whether conducting a publicity campaign that by focusing on the health hazards of tropical oils persuades people to replace such oils with healthier alternatives is a good public-health strategy.
15. People who take what others regard as a ridiculous position should not bother to say, “I mean every word!” For either their position truly is ridiculous, in which case insisting that they are serious about it only exposes them to deeper embarrassment, or else their position has merit, in which case they should meet disbelief with rational argument rather than with assurances of their sincerity.
Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?
(A) A practice that has been denounced as poor practice should not be defended on the grounds that “this is how we have always done it.” If the practice is a poor one, so much the worse that it has been extensively used; if it is not poor one, there must be a better reason for engaging in it than inertia.
(B) People who are asked why they eat some of the unusual foods they eat should not answer, “because that is what I like.” This sort of answer will sound either naive or evasive and thus will satisfy no one.
(C) People whose taste in clothes is being criticized should not replay, “Every penny I spent on these clothes I earned honestly.” For the issue raise by the critics is not how the money was come by but rather whether it was spent wisely.
(D) Scholars who champion unpopular new theories should not assume that the widespread rejection of their ideas shows that they “must be on the right track.” The truth is that few theories of any consequence are either wholly right or wholly wrong and thus there is no substitute for patient works in ascertaining which parts are right.（A）
(E) People who set themselves goals that others denounce as overly ambitious do little to silence their critics if they say, “I can accomplish this if anyone can.” Rather, those people should either admit that their critics are right or not dignify the criticism with any reply.
16. Concetta: Franchot was a great writer because she was ahead of her time in understanding that industrialization was taking an unconscionable toll on the family structure of the working class.
Alicia: Franchot was not a great writer. The mark of a great writer is the ability to move people with the power of the written word, not the ability to be among the first to grasp a social issue. Besides, the social consequences of industrialization were widely understood in Franchot’s day.
In her disagreement with Concetta, Alicia does which one of the following?
(A) accepts Concetta’s criterion and then adds evidence to Concetta’s case
(B) discredits Concetta’s evidence and then generalizes from new evidence
(C) rejects Concetta’s criterion and then disputes a specific claim
(D) disputes Concetta’s conclusion and then presents facts in support of an alternative criterion（C）
(E) attacks one of Concetta’s claims and then criticizes the structure of her argument
Questions 17-18
Zelda: Dr. Ladlow, a research psychologist, has convincingly demonstrated that his theory about the determinants of rat behavior generates consistently accurate predictions about how rats will perform in a maze. On the basis of this evidence, Dr. Ladlow has claimed that his theory is irrefutably correct.
Anson: Then Dr. Ladlow is not responsible psychologist. Dr. Ladlow’s evidence does not conclusively prove that his theory is correct. Responsible psychologists always accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect.
17. Which one of the following can be properly inferred from Anson’s argument?
(A) Dr. Ladlow’s evidence that his theory generates consistently accurate predictions about how rates will perform in a maze is inaccurate.
(B) Psychologists who can derive consistently accurate predictions about how rats will perform in a maze from their theories cannot responsibly conclude that those theories cannot be disproved.
(C) No matter how responsible psychologists are, they can never develop correct theoretical explanations.
(D) Responsible psychologists do not make predictions about how rats will perform in a maze.（B）
(E) Psychologists who accept the possibility that new evidence will show that their theories are incorrect are responsible psychologists.
18. Anson bases his conclusion about Dr. Ladlow on which one of the following?
(A) an attack on Dr. Ladlow’s character
(B) the application of a general principle
(C) the use of an ambiguous term
(D) the discrediting of facts（B）
(E) the rejection of a theoretical explanation
责任编辑：wangpeng6151
