mikemcgarry wrote:
zoezhuyan wrote:
Hi
mikemcgarry,
Sorry for my ambiguous sentence.
Sorry for my late reply because I was busy with preparation for CNY (Chinese New Year )
My former intended that
arrival it's exception is replaced with
intended effect, which means
protect the engender marine species.
Please let my clarify my question.
First, I want to cite 2 scenarios :
#1 /
A: Have you checked C's plan?
B: Yes, I have done it last Sunday.
A: What do you think of the plan's intended effect ?
B: Bla bla bla..
#2/
A: What do you think of the plan's intended effect ?
B: Bla bla bla..
Scenario #1, there is a statement that B has read the plan.
Scenario #2, there is an assumption that B has read the plan.
So, my reason is if at the beginning, A raised a question that What do you think of the plan's intended effect , then, A must based on the assumption that B has read the plan.
Like this reason, if the argument raised a question about intended effect, then I based on the assumption that the commercial fishers will use the new nets.
Therefore, I will eliminate answer if it discuss whether the commercial fishers will use new nets or not.
Here, answer C intends to discuss whether commercial fishers will use new ones or not.
That's my cross off - reasoning.
Genuinely want your recommendations about my faults
Thanks in advance.
Have a nice day
>_~
Dear
zoezhuyan,
Happy new year, my friend! Happy Year of the Rooster! I'm happy to respond.
Hi
mikemcgarry, Thank you so much.
mikemcgarry wrote:
Unfortunately, your question is still hard to follow. One problem concerns the confusing use of letters. Normally, I would think that (A), (B), and (C) would refer to the answer choices in this question. Instead, I think what you have done is create an imaginary dialogue and given the characters these letter names. Now, an imaginary dialogue to illustrate a point is fine, but it's very confusing to use the same letters for characters as for answer choices. A dialogue among characters P, Q, and R would be perfectly fine.
Thanks Mike, you mentioned me a logical flaw I made -- term shift.
I haven't realized it until read yours response.
Sometimes I can realize this kind of flaw, sometime can't.
I made the flaw this time, and I think I will try to be excellent and pay more attention to avoid it again.
I used letters, A ,b and C , because I was afraid I would offended unintendedly against people,
I did mean people A and people B in the dialog , rather than the characters of answer choices
I have not been carefully thought out.
sorry this dictation confused you.
mikemcgarry wrote:
Even assuming that the letter refer to characters in the dialogue, and not answer choices, what you are asking is still unusual. If I understand your question correct, I would say that the the distinction you are drawing doesn't matter.
Suppose I execute Plan J, with the intention that, say, more money goes to School Q. Then, suppose I leave the country or somehow never hear about School Q again. Now, zoezhuyan comes along and enacts Plan K, which happens to support Plan J. As a result of zoezhuyan enacting Plan K, it happens that School Q gets all the money it needs. In this scenario, even though I am totally out of the picture, my intended effect was still realized. It doesn't matter at all whether I am present or aware for my intended effect to be realized. Also, it doesn't matter whether zoezhuyan had the same intention. Maybe zoezhuyan didn't know a single thing about School Q or Plan J and simply was enacting Plan K for some other unrelated reason altogether. Even if it were "by accident" that School Q wound up getting money, an unintended consequence that was off everyone's radar, even then, it is still true that my intended effect was realized.
I don't know whether this answers your question. Let me know.
Mike
Hi Mike,
above quote, can I interpret this session as "
direct relationship", I mean it is one event impact directly on the other event . such as :
Because of thirst , so I need a cup of plain water to drink. -- direct relationship between thirst and need a cup of plant water .
review my imaged dialog, you said "Even assuming that the letter refer to characters in the dialogue, and not answer choices, what you are asking is still
unusual",Do you mean it is not
a direct relationship ?
I cited dialogs to illustrate that if raised a question about the intended effect of
a plan (only one plan, I found there are 2 plans in your scenario ), then I will assume the plan will be implemented.
(BTW, I edited some, and not use the letters same as the characters of answer choices)
#1 /
Mike: Have you checked Charlie's plan?
Zoe: Yes.
Mike: What do you think of the plan's intended effect ?
Zoe: it will be more successful if Charlie provides new material won't be harmful to healthy
#2/
Mike: What do you think of the intended effect of Charlie's plan?
Zoe: it will be more successful if he provides new material won't be harmful to healthy
Scenario #1, there is
a statement that Zoe has checked the plan. as the
orange words in the dialog
Scenario #2, there is
an assumption that Zoe has checked the plan. this assumption does no be stated.
Review your analogy, even though plan J and plan K are same side for getting more money to school Q ,and school Q got money as the result of plan K, it is still true that the intended effect of plan K was realized.
In short, we cannot say the intended effect was realized because of enacting plan J, in fact, because of enacting plan K.
Did I get correct ?
otherwise, I realized that here are two plans -
plan J and plan K -- which
both has the same purpose. and
only plan K was enacted by zoezhuyan .
I am curious, if there is
only plan K, and someone else ,except mikemcgarry and zoezhuyan, estimates the intended effect of plan K , does it mean that someone
assumes the plan K will be implemented , rather than
checks whether the plan will be enacted.
Review this question, the stem :
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects?the argument proposes a plan about using new nets,
the stem needs us find one choice that can support the intended effect of the plan using new nets, protecting the endanger marine species.
IMO, I don't need to
check whether the commercial fishers will use the new nets or not.
While I will
assume that the commercial fishers will use the new nets,
thus, I will cross off any answer discussing whether use new nets or not.
Therefore, I cross off C, which discuss whether commercial fishers will use or not because of the price.
Did I clearly describe my questions?
if any problem, please tell me
appreciate your explanations and point out my faults.
thanks in advance
have a nice day
>_~
close
31 Jan 2017, 00:01
