The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper. As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have become more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana, which is bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement efforts have ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine. Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The conclusion in this argument is that increased vigilance by drug enforcement authorities has resulted in an increase in the illegal use of cocaine. The author reaches this conclusion on the grounds that drug traffickers have responded to increased enforcement efforts by switching from bulkier and riskier drugs to cocaine. Presumably, the authors reasoning is that the increased enforcement efforts inadvertently brought about an increase in the supply of cocaine which, in turn, brought about the observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine. This line of reasoning is problematic in two important respects.
In the first place, the author has engaged in after this, therefore because of this reasoning. The only reason offered for believing that the increased vigilance caused the increase in cocaine use is the fact that the former preceded the latter. No additional evidence linking the two events is offered in the argument, thus leaving open the possibility that the two events are not causally related but merely correlated. This in turn leaves open the possibility that factors other than the one cited are responsible for the increase in cocaine use.
In the second place, the author assumes that an increase in the supply of cocaine is sufficient to bring about an increase in its use. While this is a tempting assumption, it is a problematic one. The presumption required to substantiate this view is that drug users are not particular about which drugs they use, so that if marijuana and heroin are not available, they will switch to whatever drug is available―cocaine in this case. The assumption does not seem reasonable on its face. Marijuana, heroin, and cocaine are not alike in their effects on users; nor are they alike in the manner in which they are ingested or in their addictive properties. The view that drug users choice of drugs is simply a function of supply overlooks these important differences.
In conclusion, the author has failed to establish a causal link between increased enforcement efforts and the observed increase in illegal cocaine use. While the enforcement activities may have been a contributing factor, to show a clear causal connection the author must examine and rule out various other factors.
SAT阅读中修辞手法的使用:低调陈述
SAT阅读扩展:your temporal lobe
四种SAT阅读题型汇总
关于SAT阅读部分长难句的学习
SAT短篇阅读实例讲解第二篇
SAT阅读的题材问题解析
SAT单篇短阅读模式及其解题策略
提高SAT阅读的方法中的两个误区
SAT阅读题的做题步骤
SAT阅读句子填空题 如何把握句子结构
专家详解SAT阅读的难度
SAT阅读中的Racial Issues 美国种族问题
SAT阅读练习:urban design
跟专家学习SAT阅读长难句
专家解读SAT阅读长难句的学习
SAT阅读题练习
SAT阅读方法之双篇对比文章
SAT阅读长难句深入分析
复杂的SAT阅读的句式结构难住了多数考生
SAT阅读官方练习题
SAT篇章阅读高分突破
SAT阅读句子填空题解题指导
SAT阅读文章中的历史常识
提高SAT阅读成绩 关注美国政治话题
专家解析SAT阅读中假设题的解题思路
SAT阅读部分成绩提高有妙招
SAT阅读长难句深入学习 5个实例
怎样有效提高SAT阅读能力
专家解读SAT阅读考试的注意事项
SAT阅读应该遵循的基本原则
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |