krypt wrote:
Been working through
OG 11 and can't reason out the following question...
Both of these questions are "Argument Construction" types, I'm hoping there's a lesson here.
First of all mate, great job! I was immediately hooked to this thread and i am sure this will become another great avenue for learning from each other.
I tend to be hot or cold with CR, today i am the former
...Let me try my hand at explaning the why the OAs are correct
Question 1 Why E is wrong:
Quote:
E. In many cases even authorized users are denied legitimate access to computers equipped with the software．
No mention of this in the premises. All they say is that in addition to the actual signature, other factors are checked... but this does is no way imply that "in many cases even authorized users will be denied access"
Why the OA is correct:
Quote:
C. Nobody can gain access to a computer equipped with the software solely by virtue of skill at forging signatures．
Yes, on first sight this may appear to be extreme. However, if you go back to the last statement:
Quote:
Even the most adept forgers cannot duplicate all of the characteristics the program analyzes．
This means that forgery alone will definitely not enable you to gain access... which is in accordance with choice C.. if you have forgery + some other skills/ techniques, then MAYBE you could gain access... BUT forgerly ALONE will defintely NOT enable you to gain access
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 1 Why D is wrong:
Quote:
D. all of any given pollutant that is to be controlled actually reaches the North Sea at present
At present? It is not mentioned anywhere that they are only considering pollutants that are currently present in the North Sea. All it says is that they are considering threats. A threat need not be present in the locality... it may be approaching.. but forget that.. this just takes on an unwarranted assumption and hence is not the correct answer
Why OA is correct:
Quote:
B. any substance to be made subject to controls can actually cause environmental damage
while i can't provide a lucid explanation for this, i can show how i arrived at the answer. I first thought of a possible answer before looking at the choices... as soon as i finished reading the stem, i was like "hmm.. so they need to find out that the effluents are harmful in some way".. Then like you, I eliminated A,C and E. I have also eliminated D (as shown above). So why did i not eliminate B? Well, first consider this:
Quote:
... favored uniform controls on the quality of effluents，whether or not specific environmental damage could be attributed to a particular source of effluent
So, what we have here is that these dudes decided to impose a uniform set of rules/ restrications on all effluents, whether or not say something in particular e.g. death of fish could be attributed to effulent X.
So, to complete the following sentence:
What must, of course, be shown, in order to avoid excessively restrictive controls，is that__ Choice B fits in perfectly
Please do let me know if you require a more detailed explanation OR if my reasoning is just plain wrong
_________________
If you like my post, consider giving me a kudos. THANKS!
close
