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 typicallyworked 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.
Why E doesnot weaken the conclusion. Answer seems to be D. Can anyone explain this pls? Tx
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Quality of carpetry
This topic has expert replies
-
crackgmat007
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:57 pm
- Thanked: 15 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:690
Last edited by crackgmat007 on Mon May 18, 2009 11:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
scoobydooby
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1035
- Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:56 pm
- Thanked: 104 times
- Followed by:1 members
to weaken the conclusion that original carpentry (pre 1930) superior to subsequent carpentry
D. correct by poe. justification: only those pre 1930 buildings with good quality carpentry survived, may be quite a few of them have been demolished. so we are in effect making an unfair comparison with ony the surviving pre 1930 carpentry with the recent carpentry at large
E. length of apprenticeship has nothing to do with quality of carpentry. if anything, this supports the argument, that recent carpentry has gone down in quality
hence, D
D. correct by poe. justification: only those pre 1930 buildings with good quality carpentry survived, may be quite a few of them have been demolished. so we are in effect making an unfair comparison with ony the surviving pre 1930 carpentry with the recent carpentry at large
E. length of apprenticeship has nothing to do with quality of carpentry. if anything, this supports the argument, that recent carpentry has gone down in quality
hence, D
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.
Out of scope
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
this can be true as more people means more uses of carpet which can lead to bad looks
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
not really weaken the arg as skills, efforts might be different.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
I am convinced with this answer but only choice which makes some sense (Although I am not happy with this answer and neither convinced with justification provided above)
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
Out of scope apprenticeship has nothing to do with carpet quality. It can also be because of many skilled resources but fewer jobs.
Out of scope
B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
this can be true as more people means more uses of carpet which can lead to bad looks
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
not really weaken the arg as skills, efforts might be different.
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
I am convinced with this answer but only choice which makes some sense (Although I am not happy with this answer and neither convinced with justification provided above)
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
Out of scope apprenticeship has nothing to do with carpet quality. It can also be because of many skilled resources but fewer jobs.
-
crackgmat007
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:57 pm
- Thanked: 15 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:690
-
vinaynp
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:55 pm
- Thanked: 5 times
- Followed by:1 members
Can you please use spoiler tag for your answers like below:-crackgmat007 wrote: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 typicallyworked 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.
Why E doesnot weaken the conclusion. Answer seems to be D. Can anyone explain this pls? Tx
Why E doesnot weaken the conclusion. Answer seems to be D . Can anyone explain this pls? Tx
-
thetrystero
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:57 pm
- Thanked: 3 times
My choice D.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.
Since the only buildings left standing were ones that were well-built, they cannot be used as a gauge of the average quality of workmanship.
C: actually helps the argument since it eliminates a point of contention.
rest are out of scope.
-
Geva@EconomistGMAT
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 905
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:38 am
- Thanked: 378 times
- Followed by:123 members
- GMAT Score:760
https://www.beatthegmat.com/brutal-cr-og ... 86353.htmlnavami wrote:I would have opted for C rather than D. Can any1 explain how can D be the answer choice?
