GRE官方试题

The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a journal on environmental issues.
"Over the past year, the Crust Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over 10,000 square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in pollution and, since West Fredonia is the home of several endangered animal species, in environmental disaster. But such disasters can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC's copper unless the company abandons its mining plans."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

题目讲解

【翻译】
去年，Consolidated Copper Company(CCC)在热带国家West
Fredonia购买了上百万平方英里的土地。在这些地方采矿将会不可避免地导致污染和环境灾害，因为West
Fredonia是很多濒危物种的栖居地。但如果消费者简单地拒绝购买用CCC所生产的铜而制造的产品，直到CCC放弃它的采矿计划就可以避免这种灾害。

【分析】
论断：消费者拒绝买CCC的铜制产品使它放弃采铜计划，就能阻止污染和环境灾害。因为过去几年CCC在WF买了上百万平方英里的土地，因为WF是很多濒危动物的家这些铜不可避免的会造成污染和环境灾害。
·被忽略前提：消费者无法辨别产品，因为CCC是采铜企业。
·不一定成立的前提：即使能分辨，CCC还可以把销售点转向其它地方。
·被忽略的前提：CCC放弃计划，还会有其他公司。
·不公平的结论：没有资料表明CCC在带来灾害，可以让他们采取措施。

【提纲】
1没有证据证明一定会导致污染和灾害。因果关系不成立。
2拒绝购买未必导致放弃计划。放弃计划也未必能避免灾害，灾害可能已经发生。
3消费者未必拒绝购买。其他措施可以采用。