求助一道逻辑题

trihesdlinUID：3830733

The damage that trucks do to highways escalates dramatically with the weight borne per axle. New regulations increase the maximum permitted vehicle weight; these regulations will therefore allow onto the highway trucks capable of doing even more damage than those currently permitted.

The argument is open up to criticism on the grounds that it A. fails to establish that the level of damage done by trucks is a serious problem B. omits evidence about one of the two relevant factors C. ignores the possibility that careful driving can lessen damage to highways D. presumes that trucks are the only vehicles capable of causing substantial damage to highways E. presumes that something is bound to happen just because it is allowed to happen

答案是B

求解释

trihesdlinUID：3830733

The damage that trucks do to highways escalates dramatically with the weight borne per axle. New regulations increase the maximum permitted vehicle weight; these regulations will therefore allow onto the highway trucks capable of doing even more damage than those currently permitted.

The argument is open up to criticism on the grounds that it
A. fails to establish that the level of damage done by trucks is a serious problem
B. omits evidence about one of the two relevant factors
C. ignores the possibility that careful driving can lessen damage to highways
D. presumes that trucks are the only vehicles capable of causing substantial damage to highways
E. presumes that something is bound to happen just because it is allowed to happen

重新贴一下题目 刚刚的格式有点问题。。。

我Me是个好人UID：3724812

trihesdlin 发表于 2017-9-17 14:16
The damage that trucks do to highways escalates dramatically with the weight borne per axle. New reg ...

这段话的大意是说, 卡车越重, 对路面的损害就越大; 新政策提升了maximum weight, 所以就会使卡车对路面造成比现在更大的损害.

conclusion: damage onto the highways is even more
premise: new regulations increase the maximum permitted vehicle weight
于是我们得到了argument core, 即增加maximum weight会增大卡车对路面的损害.

Gap?
一句话: 政策到位了, 车不一定到位.
这就好比我把maximum permitted weight(factor 1)从5t增加到6t, 但如果压根儿就没有>原来5t的卡车(factor 2, i.e., evidence)出现, 那所谓的“损害”也谈不上什么增大不增大的了.

选B.

trihesdlinUID：3830733

我Me是个好人 发表于 2017-9-17 16:39
这段话的大意是说, 卡车越重, 对路面的损害就越大; 新政策提升了maximum weight, 所以就会使卡车对路面 ...

感恩

（我感觉我需要对英语句子的理解更快才行QAQ）