课件编号10262544

2022届高考英语二轮复习:阅读理解技巧指导学案(含答案)

日期:2024-06-17 科目:英语 类型:高中学案 查看:44次 大小:547432Byte 来源:二一课件通
预览图 1/5
2022届,高考,英语,二轮,复习,阅读理解
  • cover
阅读理解干扰项中常见的九大逻辑错误 思维品质,是高考阅读理解考查的重点。因此,“逻辑混乱”常常是命题者设置干扰项的重要手段。在阅读训练中,要警惕一些“诡辩”,有些表达乍看上去似乎很煽情,也有道理,但实则存在思维漏洞。做错了一道阅读理解题,最好的订正方法是,追根溯源,从逻辑这个根源上去分析我们的思维漏洞。 我们先试一试下面的几个小题,说说它们在逻辑推理上存在什么问题? 逻辑推理: If Jack is running, then she is moving. Jack is not running. Therefore, he is not moving.? Several Nazis were members of the Kaiser Club. Hans was a member of the Kaiser Club. Therefore, Hans was a Nazi. Fans make a lot of noise. Madame Butterfly was using her fan. Therefore, she was making a lot of noise. Loving one’s neighbour is a mark of altrusim (利他主义). Jack was a great lover. It follows that he was an altruist. All the people at the table had their heads shaved. Jack was at the table. Therefore, Jack had his head shaved. Professor A says Jack’s plan is good. Professor B says Jack’s plan is good. Professor C says Jack’s plan is good. Therefore, Jack’s plan is good.? 阅读理解干扰项中常见的九种逻辑错误 错误类型 实例 1.把相关性当成因果性。 阅读训练中有这样一个案例:在某个小镇上,当冰淇淋的销量越高,犯罪率就越高。这两件事情有相关性,但是并不代表着冰淇淋的销量高,是导致犯罪率上升的原因。事实上是由于冰淇淋销量高的时候往往是夏天,天气热,因此居民大多开着窗,因此入室盗窃作案的情况就有了显著上升……。总而言之,因果性(causality)会导致相关性(correlation),反之则不成立。 2.滥用专家意见 专家是某个特定领域的权威。在论证中,去向相关领域的专家请教是合情合理的做法。但是在向专家请教时,一定要保持警惕。我们来看以下论证:史密斯教授说项目A很好。琼斯教授说项目A很好。约翰教授说项目A很好。所以,我们应该接受项目 A。让我们假设这三个教授都是项目 A 相关领域内真正的专家。可是我们更深入地来想一下,没有任何一个教授告诉我们为什么他会认为项目A是好的。教授们没有论证。这个项目会被接受仅仅是因为他们这么说。但是,占据主导地位的应该是论证本身,而不是专家的话。? 3.偷梁换柱。 干扰项与原文高度相似,命题者在不易引人注意的地方换了一两个词汇造成句意的改变;或者把一个事物的特征说成是另一个事物的特征;或者把他人的观点说成是作者的观点。这类干扰项的特点就是“张冠李戴”。A common sight is that of old Persian men sitting in the corner talking loudly about world topics, watching news events on TV, drinking a black tea known as Persian chai, and reading local Persian newspapers all the while trying to finish off their plates piled with food.57. What activity is also mentioned apart from dining in the restaurant?A. Watching news events on TV.B. Drinking a kind of black coffee.C. Reading local English newspapers.D. Discussing world topics in low voices. 4.以先后论因果 我们这里所要讨论的这种谬误,从拉丁语直接翻译过来就是“发生在其后,故因其所致”。这种谬误源自粗心。在因果关系中,原因总是先于结果发生,所以大家会有“发生在结果之前的就是原因”的错觉。比如,一个具有哲学思想倾向的原始人,有一天突然注意到,鸟儿总是在太阳升起之前歌唱。由此,他高兴地得出结论:是鸟儿的歌唱导致了每天都有日出。他犯的就是以先后论因果谬误。? ... ...

~~ 您好,已阅读到文档的结尾了 ~~