削弱题同假设题和支持题有很多相似之处，回忆一下前面我们讲过的题型解题思路，可以同样运用到削弱类题型当中。
第一种：在前提和结论之间建立一种联系，加上一个必要条件，使结论成立。
第二种：如果我们想要使前提到结论成立，就要保证前提可行，以达到使结论成立的目的。
第三种：从前提到结论建立了一个因果关系。为了使前提到结论成立，就要排除其它因素的影响，即当给出一个原因到达一个结果时，排除其它因素的干扰。
支持类题型解题和假设类题型解题很相似，支持类题型解题，除了用上面三种方法解题外，还有就是找到前提和结论的关键信息，在关键信息上对原文结论进行加强。我们在解削弱题时只要把上面三种思路反过来思考就可以了。也就是：
第一种：在前提和结论之间断开联系，使结论成立可能性降低。
第二种：使前提变得不可行，以达到削弱结论的目的。
第三种：找到其它因素的影响，即当给出一个原因到达一个结果时，找到其它因素的干扰。
下面我们通过几道题目来看一下削弱题具体如何解题。
一、削弱题例题一。
Homeowners aged 40 to 50 are more likely to purchase ice cream and are more likely to purchase it in larger amounts than are members of any other demographic group. The popular belief that teenagers eat more ice cream than adults must, therefore, be false.
The argument is flawed primarily because the author?
A. fails to distinguish between purchasing and consuming.
B. does not supply information about homeowners in age groups other than 40 to 50.
C. depends on popular belief rather than on documented research findings.
D. does not specify the precise amount of ice cream purchased by any demographic group.
E. discusses ice cream rather than more nutritious and healthful foods.
1、题意：40-50岁人群比起其他年龄段人群更愿意购买且大量购买冰淇淋，所以通常大家所认为的青少年比成人更喜欢吃冰淇淋这个观点是错误的。问：这个逻辑的缺陷在哪?
2、解题思路：
P1：Homeowners aged 40 to 50 are more likely to
1)purchase ice cream
2)purchase it in larger amounts than are members of any other demographic group
—>C：teenagers eat more ice cream than adults—> false
分析：题目考查的是割裂逻辑关系型的负向逻辑，该逻辑缺陷在于混淆了关键对象的关键属性。简单来说，题干关键对象是成年人和未成年人两组人群，关键属性是愿意购买冰淇淋和愿意吃冰淇淋。买冰欺凌并等于吃冰欺凌，这就是题目的突破点——缺陷。
3、选项分析：
A选项直接指出了原文的漏洞——买冰欺凌并等于吃冰欺凌，削弱了结论，正确。
B选项是说作者没有提供其他年龄层的资料，注意homeowner就不大可能是小朋友了。
C选项的依据不是建立在研究发现上，是无关选项。
D选项是说没有提供任何年龄层确切的吃雪糕的量——任何年龄层就是说如果作者提供了老年人也算过关了。
E选项引入无关对象。
二、削弱题例题二。
Cable-television spokesperson: Subscriptions to cable television are a bargain in comparison to "free" television. Remember that "free" television is not really free. It is consumers, in the end, who pay for the costly advertising that supports "free" television.
Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the position of the cable-television spokesperson?
A. Consumers who do not own television sets are less likely to be influenced in their purchasing decisions by television advertising than are consumers who own television sets.
B. Subscriptions to cable television include access to some public-television channels, which do not accept advertising.
C. For locations with poor television reception, cable television provides picture quality superior to that provided by free television.
D. There is as much advertising on many cable-television channels as there is on "free" television channels.
E. Cable-television subscribers can choose which channels they wish to receive.
1、题意：有线电视发言人：订有线电视比“免费”电视更便宜。记住“免费”电视并不真正免费，消费者最终会为昂贵的广告费买单。
2、提干分析：
P：consumers pay for the costly advertising that supports "free" television
—>C：Subscriptions to cable television are a bargain in comparison to "free" television.
原文说付费有线电视与免费的电视相比有优势，原因是免费电视通过广告转嫁费用到消费者;这里有一个隐藏的前提条件是：付费有线电视没有广告。所以，削弱时只要找到这个隐藏条件就可以了。
3、选项分析：
A 没有电视的消费者更不可能被有点事的消费者影响;无关，排除。
B 有线电视的用户包括接受一些没有广告的公共频道; 有线电视没广告，增强，方向相反。
C 对电视接收不好的地区，有线电视提供比免费电视更好的画质;脱离逻辑链，无关。
D 很多有线电视频道的广告和“免费”电视一样多;说明有线电视也有广告，反话削弱，正确。
E 有线电视用户可选择喜爱的频道; 无关。
三、削弱题例题三。
Last year the rate of inflation was 1.2 percent, but for the current year it has been 4 percent. We can conclude that inflation is on an upward trend and the rate will be still higher next year.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion above?
A. The inflation figures were computed on the basis of a representative sample of economic data rather than all of the available data.
B. Last year a dip in oil prices brought inflation temporarily below its recent stable annual level of 4 percent.
C. Increases in the pay of some workers are tied to the level of inflation, and at an inflation rate of 4 percent or above, these pay raises constitute a force causing further inflation.
D. The 1.2 percent rate of inflation last year represented a 10-year low.
E. Government intervention cannot affect the rate of inflation to any significant degree.
1、题意：去年通货膨胀率是1.2%，但是近年来是4%，我们可以推断，通货膨胀呈上升趋势，并且通货膨胀率明年还会更高。问削弱。
2、提干分析：
P1：Last year the rate of inflation was 1.2 percent
P2：for the current year it has been 4 percent
—>C：inflation is on an upward trend and the rate will be still higher next year
分析原题，两个前提分别是去年和今年的通货膨胀率，由此得出了明年通货膨胀的趋势，这势必是一种猜测，并没有充足的理由，所以结论得出的过程是缺乏论证的。
3、选项分析：
A选项说通货膨胀率是通过有代表性的样本统计得出来的，是支持结论，方向相反，错。
B选项说去年是油价的上涨导致膨胀率暂时低于recent stable level (4%) 暗示了一个 stable trend 4%，由此应该推测出明年大概也应该是4%左右，说明不是increase trend。解释了去年通货膨胀下降到1.2%的原因，也不能说明明年通货膨胀上升，削弱了结论。
C选项说通货膨胀明年会更高，是支持选项。
D选项去年是十年来最低，想暗示一种非increase trend，前十年10%，去年1.2%，今年4%-->非Increase trend; 但是，若前十年1.25%，去年1.2%，今年4%，就是increase trend。
E选项政府的干扰不会对通货膨胀率造成影响。这是一个排除其它因素干扰的选项，是支持型选项，和需要的正确答案方向相反。
四、削弱题例题四。
Offshore oil-drilling operations entail an unavoidable risk of an oil spill, but importing oil on tankers presently entails an even greater such risk per barrel of oil. Therefore, if we are to reduce the risk of an oil spill without curtailing our use of oil, we must invest more in offshore operations and import less oil on tankers.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A. Tankers can easily be redesigned so that their use entails less risk of an oil spill.
B. Oil spills caused by tankers have generally been more serious than those caused by offshore operations.
C. The impact of offshore operations on the environment can be controlled by careful management.
D. Offshore operations usually damage the ocean floor, but tankers rarely cause such damage.
E. Importing oil on tankers is currently less expensive than drilling for it offshore.
1、题意：近海挖油会产生一个不能避免的油溢出风险，但是用油轮进口油会产生更大的风险，THEREFORE，如果我们要降低油溢出的风险，我们必须更多的投资于近海采油从而更少的依赖于用油轮进口油。求weaken。看原文therefore之前是个原因，therefore后面是结论，典型的A导致B，因此weaken必定是A不能导致B。
2、提干分析：
P1: Offshore oil-drilling operations entail an unavoidable risk of an oil spill
P2: importing oil on tankers presently entails an even greater such risk per barrel of oil
C: to reduce the risk of an oil spill without curtailing our use of oil, we must invest more in offshore operations and import less oil on tankers.
结论是两者比较，一个是用油轮进口油，另一个是投资于近海采油，我们要想削弱结论，一定是使结论认为好的一方变得不利，使结论认为不好的一方变得有利。
3、选项分析：
A选项说进口桶装油能改装油桶使得不漏油。所以可以多进口油，这是使结论认为不好的一方变得有利，可选。
B选项是将两者进行比较，说第二种方法比第一种方法好，正好和结论的方向相同，是支持结论不是削弱结论。
C选项关于海洋环境的污染是可以控制的。和两者比较无关，错误。
D选项并没有说出，进口桶装油一定好，钻井一定不好。因为，钻进虽然有污染海底风险，说不定进口桶装油有更更更大的污染海面的风险。
E选项把两者比较，但是比较的是两者的成本，和结论无关，排除。
五、削弱题例题五。
In the last decade there has been a significant decrease in coffee consumption. During this same time, there has been increasing publicity about the adverse long-term effects on health of the caffeine in coffee. Therefore, the decrease in coffee consumption must have been caused by consumers’ awareness of the harmful effects of caffeine.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the explanation above?
A. On average, people consume 30 percent less coffee today than they did 10 years ago.
B. Heavy coffee drinkers may have mild withdrawal symptoms, such as headaches, for a day or so after significantly decreasing their coffee consumption.
C. Sales of specialty types of coffee have held steady as sales of regular brands have declined.
D. The consumption of fruit juices and caffeine-free herbal teas has increased over the past decade.
E. Coffee prices increased steadily in the past decade because of unusually severe frosts in coffee-growing nations.
1、题意：在过去十年里咖啡的消费量下降。同时，咖啡因对于人体健康长期影响的宣传得到了普及。所以，咖啡消费量下降一定是因为消费者对咖啡负面效应的意识得到了加强。
问题：下面哪一个选项最大程度上质疑了题干中的解释。
2、提干分析：
P1：a significant decrease in coffee consumption
P2：increasing publicity about the adverse long-term effects on health of the caffeine in coffee
C：the decrease in coffee consumption must have been caused by consumers’ awareness of the harmful effects of caffeine
分析：题干中的论据和论点相互之间在一定程度上是有合理逻辑关系的，所以我们要质疑题干逻辑最有可能的思考方向是引入他因削弱。
3、选项分析：
A选项当前咖啡的人均消费量比十年前下降了百分之三十。为题干中的解释间接提供了论据，逻辑方向相反。
B选项饮用咖啡很多的人群在减少咖啡饮用量之后诸如头疼此类症状得到了缓解，同样是在支持题干中的解释逻辑，逻辑方向相反。
C选项特殊品种咖啡的销售量维持稳定，普通咖啡品牌则下降。无关，无法削弱题干解释。
D选项果汁和无咖啡因的茶类消费量在过去十年上升，侧面为题干中的解释提供了论据，逻辑方向相反。
E选项咖啡价格在过去十年内因为产地自然灾害稳步上升。价格上升导致销量下降这是一个最合理削弱题干解释的他因，正确!
习题练习：
Some anthropologists study modern-day societies of foragers in an effort to learn about our ancient ancestors who were also foragers. A flaw in this strategy is that forager societies are extremely varied. Indeed, any forager society with which anthropologists are familiar has had considerable contact with modern, non-forager societies.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the criticism made above of the anthropologists' strategy?
A. forager societies throughout history have had a number of important features in common that are absent from other types of societies.
B. Most ancient forager societies either dissolved or made a transition to another way of life.
C. All anthropologists study one kind or another of modern-day society.
D. Many anthropologists who study modern-day forager societies do not draw inferences about ancient societies on the basis of their studies.
E. Even those modern-day forager societies that have not had significant contact with modern societies are importantly different from ancient forager societies.
例题分析：
1、削弱题：题意：人类学家为了研究狩猎者祖先而去研究现代狩猎者。此策略的不足在于狩猎者的社会是多变的。人类学家所熟悉的狩猎社会与现代非狩猎社会有联系。
2、目的方法类：目的：研究狩猎者祖先。方法：研究现代狩猎者。思路：本题求weaken criticism。注意问题的问法，问题是对criticism的weaken，其实就是支持人类学家的strategy。其实就是证明人类学家可以通过研究现代狩猎者而去研究狩猎者祖先。
3、正确项：选项一。所有的狩猎者社会都有他们独特的特征。说明他们既然有这独特的特征，可以通过研究现代狩猎者去研究狩猎者祖先。因此是weaken了criticism。
4、其它选项：
选项二：所有的古代狩猎者要么消失了，要么转换了生活方式，并没有有效weaken。
选项三：所有的人类学家学习一种或者其他现代社会。无关。
选项四：许多学习现代狩猎社会的人类学家并不能从他们的研究中draw inference。无关。
选项五：即使现代社会狩猎者没有与现代社会有联系，他们也与古代狩猎社会截然不同。加强了结论，而不是削弱。
拓展阅读：
削弱题所属分类。推理按照不同的标准，可以划分成不同的类型：
1、按照前提与结论之间推断关系性质的不同，可以把推理划分成两大类：演绎推理和非演绎推理。
2、按照前提和结论一般性程度的不同，可以把推理分为演绎、归纳和类比。削弱题与加强型、假设型、评价型归属于演绎题之中。
您还可能关注：
