juyu \$m[1]:After viewing this old and long discussion, I still prefer choice(A). Here is why.
In this question, we are required to find a reason to support the claim that the governor's action (deny the inmates' access of college-level courses) is counter to the government's goal (decrease the crime rate). OK, looks here. If we carefully compare the choice (A) to the claim, we can easily find the following:
not being able to take college-level courses (= governor's action = deny the access of college-level courses)...is unlikely to (= counter to) deter anyone from a crime...(= government's goal = to decrease the crime rate).
Therefore, the choice (A) directly tell you that the governor's action indeed be unable to attain the government's goal.
Welcome any other suggestion!
不同意紅色部份的等式… deter anyone from a crime就等於decrease the crime rate 嗎?
A取非可以解譯為,"剝奪就學管道"確實可能阻止一人犯罪。僅阻止一人犯罪怎麼能說是能降低犯罪率呢?因此A取非不能否定原題因到果的推論
選C, 這是確認因果關係的assumption, 排除選擇就學的人是本身就比較不易累犯之它因