Critical Reasoning

114. 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 signifi cantly 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 signifi cantly since 1930.

Please explain the correct answer with reasons.

IMP 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.: How do you say this on the basis stimulus given.Out
(B) Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. Not relevent
(C) The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not signifi cantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930. : Does not help giving the weakness
(D) The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. : This is the only choice which helps resolving the issue at hand
(E) The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined signifi cantly since 1930. : Irrelevent....Is nto mentioned anywhere is the stimulus.

but how does the option weakens the conclusion of the argument that "Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently" ?

anks17 wrote:but how does the option weakens the conclusion of the argument that "Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently" ?

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

This choice means that there are only available building with the superior quality. The worse buildings that were built before 1930 are not available now. (So, the guildbook writer visited unfortunately in the bad buildings that were built after 1930 - although it is not necessary information) Therefore, weaken the argument.

I posted an explanation here:

https://www.beatthegmat.com/source-og12-t85262.html

anks17 wrote:but how does the option weakens the conclusion of the argument that "Clearly carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently" ?

Thats what you are supposed to do in a weaknen question attack the conclusion.