8一道逻辑练习3里的题，求讨论！

JanecoconutUID: 3449686

Juries in criminal trials do not base verdicts on uncor-
roborated testimony given by any one witness. Rightly
so, because it is usually prudent to be highly skeptical
of unsubstantiated claims made by any one person.
But then, to be consistent, juries should end an all-
too-common practice: convicting defendants on the
basis of an uncorroborated full confession.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the
argument above?
(A) Juries often acquit in cases in which a defendant
retracts a full confession made before trial.
(B) The process of jury selection is designed to screen
out people who have a firm opinion about the
defendant's guilt in advance of the trial.
(C) Defendants sometimes make full confessions when
they did in fact do what they are accused of
doing and have come to believe that the prose-
cutor has compelling proof of this.
(D) Highly suggestible people who are accused of
wrongdoing sometimes become so unsure of
their own recollection of the past that they can
come to accept the accusations made against
them.
(E) Many people believe that juries should not con-
vict defendants who have not made a full con-
fession.

我的困惑在于，没有明确的感受到题干里作者的attitude，唯一的暗示在于but，这里有一个转折。
题干先说了，法官不相信没有证据支持的证人的证词，然后说，但是最后法官都会做这样一个practice，相信被告的忏悔，并相信了被告的有罪。

这是矛盾的，huh，但是要strengthen的话，C说被告确实在最后关头会说实话；D说被告在审判最后自己都迷失了不知道有没有犯罪

所以关键是了解题干他想支持什么啊，但是题干的态度很暧昧不清。。。题干如果就是在支持法官的做法而只是一个陈述段子的话，那就应该选C；题干如果是在质疑法官这种做法，那就是D

求问，怎么判断原题干的conclusion呢。

谢谢！

crazyrobinUID: 2368627

but then后面是conclusion

SoohooBaiUID: 3443645

楼主，这个逻辑题很典型的对比啊。先说了法官不能根据一个不靠谱的证词就定罪，但是提出了另一个问题就是法官却会根据一个不靠谱的自首来定罪，这是表里前后不一的，就是所谓的 inconsistent。所以后面才有 to be consistent,那么最能支持这个逻辑的就是，自首有的时候会误判，就和不靠谱的证词会导致误判一样。所以，你看C，C没有误判把。。。那么答案就是Ｄ。

SoohooBaiUID: 3443645

补充一句，这题是找负感情的。。。C是正面的，而不是应该改良的。D是个反面的。。。

DionysosUID: 2837613

楼主好像没理解题目的意思。题目前面说法官不会根据未经证实的证词定罪（因为未经证实的证词不可靠），but之后就是结论：那么也不该根据未经证实的供词定罪。

因此，strengthen这个结论的条件就应该是：未经证实的供词也是不可信的

只有D是这个意思：回忆不可靠

gjxwinUID: 3457128

crazyrobin 发表于 2013-8-5 12:09
but then后面是conclusion

前辈，能否给我发份magoosh三空题啊，你上次帖子里的链接没有了，785797409@qq.com，谢谢！！

crazyrobinUID: 2368627

gjxwin 发表于 2013-8-5 20:27
前辈，能否给我发份magoosh三空题啊，你上次帖子里的链接没有了，，谢谢！！

不能，copyright infringement寄托已经收到了Magoosh的警告信。所以这个不会再发布或者网络上分享了

gjxwinUID: 3457128

crazyrobin 发表于 2013-8-5 20:40
不能，copyright infringement寄托已经收到了Magoosh的警告信。所以这个不会再发布或者网络上分享了

好吧

JanecoconutUID: 3449686

SoohooBai 发表于 2013-8-5 17:24
楼主，这个逻辑题很典型的对比啊。先说了法官不能根据一个不靠谱的证词就定罪，但是提出了另一个问题就是法 ...

But then, to be consistent, juries should end an all-
too-common practice: convicting defendants on the
basis of an uncorroborated full confession

他题干写的是to be consistent。。。还有我觉得应该是juries should not end an all-too-common practice，才是清楚的表明了自己的立场啊。。先谢了！

SoohooBaiUID: 3443645

Janecoconut 发表于 2013-8-6 03:21
But then, to be consistent, juries should end an all-
too-common practice: convicting defendants  ...

should end...不是should not end.....同学你看错了。法官应该终止这个不严谨的行为。。。。

JanecoconutUID: 3449686

SoohooBai 发表于 2013-8-6 09:46
should end...不是should not end.....同学你看错了。法官应该终止这个不严谨的行为。。。。

:dizzy:

明白咯，哎，好像给自己一枪。。