很多同學(xué)都在努力準(zhǔn)備著GAMT考試，為自己的申請(qǐng)?jiān)龉馓聿�。但是想拿GAMT高分也并不是件容易的事。下面是小編為大家整理收集的關(guān)于GMAT寫(xiě)作的七宗罪，歡迎大家的閱讀。
一、什么是“七宗罪”
GMAT作文七宗罪是指GMAT駁論文Argument題目中存在的邏輯漏洞或錯(cuò)誤，考生根據(jù)考試中常見(jiàn)的邏輯漏洞和考察方向把其總結(jié)為“七宗罪”，既形象又方便參加GMAT考試備考的考生進(jìn)行背誦�？忌趥淇紩r(shí)可以按照七宗罪中的邏輯錯(cuò)誤類(lèi)型進(jìn)行有目的的查找，一方面節(jié)省了考試時(shí)間，另一方面確保找到的邏輯錯(cuò)誤的準(zhǔn)確，對(duì)于提升GMAT寫(xiě)作效率也非常有幫助。
通�？忌f(shuō)的七宗罪指的就是：第一宗罪：無(wú)因果聯(lián)系，第二宗罪：樣本不足，第三宗罪：錯(cuò)誤類(lèi)比(橫向)，第四宗罪：時(shí)地全等(沒(méi)有用發(fā)展的觀(guān)點(diǎn)看待問(wèn)題)，第五宗罪：二者擇一(非此即彼)，第六宗罪：可疑調(diào)查，第七宗罪：結(jié)論無(wú)據(jù)(無(wú)根據(jù)假設(shè))。可能個(gè)別地方的叫法不完全一樣，考生只要知道其表達(dá)的真正意義即可。
二、七宗罪包含哪些內(nèi)容
第一宗罪：無(wú)因果聯(lián)系，是指作者給出的解釋和得出的結(jié)論沒(méi)有因果上的聯(lián)系，或者是二者毫不相關(guān)。
The author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. The line of the reasoning is that because A occurred before B, the former event is responsible for the latter. But this is fallacious reasoning unless other possible causal explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C is the cause of these events or perhaps B is caused by D.
第二宗罪：樣本不足，是指給出的論據(jù)或例子不充分，不足以說(shuō)明某個(gè)問(wèn)題，不能支撐作者得出這樣的結(jié)論。
The evidence the author provides is insufficient to support the conclusion drawn from it. One example is logically unsounded to establish a general conclusion, unless it can be shown that A1 is representative of all A. It is possible that.... In fact, in face of such limited evidence, the conclusion that B is completely unwarranted.
第三宗罪: 錯(cuò)誤類(lèi)比，即把毫不相關(guān)的兩個(gè)事物拿來(lái)作比較，并由此得出一些結(jié)論。
The argument rests on the assumption that A is analogous to B in all respects. This assumption is weak, since although there are points of comparison between A and B, there is much dissimilarity as well. For example, A..., however, B.... Thus, it is likely much more difficult for B to do....
第四宗罪：時(shí)地全等，主要是指沒(méi)有用發(fā)展的觀(guān)點(diǎn)看待問(wèn)題，拿過(guò)去的事例和現(xiàn)在的作對(duì)比，并由此得出結(jié)論。
The author commits the fallacy of “all things are equal”. The fact that happened two years ago is not a sound evidence to draw a conclusion that.... The author assumes without justification that the background conditions have remained the same at different times or at different locations. However, it is not clear in this argument whether the current conditions at AA are the same as they used to be two years ago. Thus it is impossible to conclude that..
第五宗罪：二者擇一，即限制了結(jié)論的范圍，按照非此即彼的觀(guān)點(diǎn)得出結(jié)論。
The author assumes that AA and BB are mutually exclusive alternatives and there is no room for a middle ground. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either-or choice. Common sense tells us that adjusting both AA and BB might produce better results.
第六宗罪：可疑調(diào)查，指作者提供的證據(jù)是片面的或者是有限的，不能保證結(jié)論的順利推出。
The poll cited by the author is too vague to be informative. The claim does not indicate who conducted the poll, who responded, or when, where and how the poll was conducted. Until these questions are answered, the results of the survey are worthless as evidence for the conclusion.
第七宗罪：結(jié)論無(wú)據(jù)，指得出的結(jié)論是毫無(wú)根據(jù)的，或者是前面的假設(shè)是不能成立的。
The author falsely depends on gratuitous assumption that.... However, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. In fact, this is not necessarily the case. For example, it is more likely that.... Therefore, this argument is unwarranted without ruling out such possibility。