Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development.  They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it.  That plan is ill-conceived:  if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders.  On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable.  But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires.  And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.   In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?_请唐老师来解答一下此题的做题技巧。首先我读这两句话，也扫了一眼两句话之间的话语，读完觉得是“互怼”的。因为中间有个，That plan is ill-conceived, 感觉这是明显的否定啊...但是正确答案里面的解释是相互顺承的。不知道我错在哪了。是不是中间的不用读？出国考试答疑器_GMAT

[Critical Reasoning]

试题详情

题目：

Environmental organizations want to preserve the land surrounding the Wilgrinn Wilderness Area from residential development. They plan to do this by purchasing that land from the farmers who own it. That plan is ill-conceived: if the farmers did sell their land, they would sell it to the highest bidder, and developers would outbid any other bidders. On the other hand, these farmers will never actually sell any of the land, provided that farming it remains viable. But farming will not remain viable if the farms are left unmodernized, and most of the farmers lack the financial resources modernization requires. And that is exactly why a more sensible preservation strategy would be to assist the farmers to modernize their farms to the extent needed to maintain viability.

In the argument as a whole, the two boldface proportions play which of the following roles?

选项:

A、The first presents a goal that the argument rejects as ill-conceived; the second is evidence that is presented as grounds for that rejection.

B、The first presents a goal that the argument concludes cannot be attained; the second is a reason offered in support of that conclusion.

C、The first presents a goal that the argument concludes can be attained; the second is a judgment disputing that conclusion.

D、The first presents a goal, strategies for achieving which are being evaluated in the argument; the second is a judgment providing a basis for the argument's advocacy of a particular strategy.

E、The first presents a goal that the argument endorses; the second presents a situation that the argument contends must be changed if that goal is to be met in the foreseeable future.

提问：

请唐老师来解答一下此题的做题技巧。首先我读这两句话，也扫了一眼两句话之间的话语，读完觉得是“互怼”的。因为中间有个，That plan is ill-conceived, 感觉这是明显的否定啊...但是正确答案里面的解释是相互顺承的。不知道我错在哪了。是不是中间的不用读？

解答：

解答：

点赞-2

出国考试答疑器，
解决你的问题

在这里你可以:

[Critical Reasoning]

试题详情

题目：

选项:

答案:

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

问个问题

学长故事

免扫码试听

24小时随身答疑小程序

GMAT每日一题

出国考试答疑器，解决你的问题

在这里你可以:

[Critical Reasoning]

试题详情

题目：

选项:

答案:

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

提问：

解答：

问个问题

学长故事

免扫码试听

24小时随身答疑小程序

GMAT每日一题

出国考试答疑器，
解决你的问题