不懂这题的逻辑，求解！ Kernland imposes a high tariff on the export of unprocessed cashew nuts in order to ensure that the nuts are sold to domestic processing plants. If the tariff were lifted and unprocessed cashews were sold at world market prices, more farmers could profit by growing cashews. However, since all the processing plants are in urban areas, removing the tariff would seriously hamper the government’s effort to reduce urban unemployment over the next five years. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument? A. Some of the by-products of processing cashews are used for manufacturing paints and plastics. B. Other countries in which cashews are processed subsidize their processing plants C. More people in Kernland are engaged in farming cashews than in processing them. D. Buying unprocessed cashews at lower than world market prices enables cashew processors in Kernland to sell processed nuts at competitive prices. E. A lack of profitable crops is driving an increasing number of small farmers in Kernland off their land and into the cities.

请问may老师，这题该用什么思路来做？

请问张老师，这道题为什么D不对？我有我觉得second paragraph最后一句话特别指向D

请问老师，这道题为什么second part是”evidence”? 还有、不确定First part到底是background info还是premise?

请问老师，这道quant题应该如何快速算？

请问老师，这题我选E因为前面作者讲过 “asset sharing alliances aim at cost efficiencies”。我以为inference题目一般都要找原文来选答案。请问这个思路哪里不对了吗？

怎么解出

第二问里的most of 怎么界定啊，四个里有两个也能是most of 吗

为什么答案是C啊，第二个式子取n=1是不对的吧

1990-2005年 zyx的乡村地区能喝到干净水的人增加。很明显是国家提高了基础设施建设。寻找一个反对这个推理 感觉五个选项没有一个是对的，我选的b我知道它不对 但是d选项我推不出来，想听相关性解法

能理解a 不知道b为什么也可以