CR question

josephcho77 · Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 6:47 am Post subject: CR question

Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the country and have noticed that in those built before 1930 the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward. Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument?

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.

What do you think the correct answer would be?
I chose B but I think it's wrong since B weakens the fact, not the argument.

gmatrant · Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:32 am Post subject: Re: CR question

samirpandeyit62 · Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 8:42 am Post subject:

E IMO, coz it wekeans the arguement by introducing an alternate reason i.e underminig the authors claim that the carpeneters before 1930 worked with more effort,skill & care.

josephcho77 · Posted: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:41 pm Post subject:

The OA is "D",
Still have hard time making relationship between the argument and "D" ^^

Jimat · Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 11:00 pm Post subject:

Option B can be the answer too. Because the fact that hotels built before 1930 have more guest than those built after 1930 could drive the reader to assume that the usage of the hotel influenced by the number of guest could deteriorate the wood work of the hotel.What is the OA?

mayonnai5e · Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:13 am Post subject:

You can solve this using POE. Using my keyword search technique, I've highlighted the major keywords of each answer choice. The keywords point to extraneous information and topics that are out of scope - these are answers that can be eliminated.

The correct answer should have some information about the link between hotels built before 1930 and those built after 1930; it should not contain information about other things.

A. The quality of original carpentry in hotels is generally far superior to the quality of original carpentry in other structures, such as houses and stores.
--> Houses, stores and other structures are not important because the argument discusses only hotels built before and after 1930. Eliminate.

B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
--> accommodation of guests is not important to the topic at hand and thus this answer choice can be eliminated.

C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
--> the argument discusses carpentry not materials so this can be eliminated

D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.

E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
--> apprenticeship has nothing to do with quality of the carpentry; this option also fails to point out a difference between the time period before 1930 and after 1930. eliminate.

D is really the only choice left after POE. The answer choice points out that the buildings that were built with poor quality carpentry have been destroyed so only high quality carpentry hotels are left still standing. If the low quality hotels were still around then the author would have seen hotels that were built with inferior quality and thus his argument that all carpenters that worked on hotels before 1930 worked with more skill, care and effort. D is correct.

samirpandeyit62 · Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:37 am Post subject:

Hi Lee,
You have given a very good explanation, but the question asks
"Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the guidebook writer’s argument? "

so IMO the correct answer should weaken the conclusion drawn by the guidebook writer i.e "Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently. "

as I interpret your expln for D it seems that u are actually pointing out that the conclusion drawn is correct, i.e "strenghten the conclusion"

Pls correct me if I'm wrong.

mayonnai5e · Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 7:10 am Post subject:

samirpandeyit62 · Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 10:35 pm Post subject:

Thanks very much Lee, I got it now.