BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

carpentry work

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:43 pm
Thanked: 15 times
Followed by:1 members

carpentry work

by mehrasa » Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:53 am
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.


[spoiler]OA:D but don't u think choice D is repetition of one of the premise in the argument.. if so, how it weaken the argument[/spoiler]
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 3:35 am
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:610

by karthikgmat » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:08 am
If OA is D, does it say anything that weakens the argument " carpenters worked with more skill ,care"?

After looking through options many times I came to E
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:59 am

by popy » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:09 am
I'm confused could anyone please post the original answer


thank u
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:59 am

by popy » Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:09 am
I'm confused could anyone please post the original answer


thank u
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:48 am

by rghoshal » Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:40 pm
To me, the answer seems to be B. Please refer to the logic below:

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.
-- Out of scope. Comparison with quality in building Houses & stores irrelevant.

(B) Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
-- Correct. This speaks about a factor which can stand for a decrease in quality. If hotels are more spacious, then thats a boon in spite of a decrease in quality.

(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.
-- Incorrect. This is an assumtion to compare quality.

(D) The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and
be demolished.
-- Incorrect. This is an evidence for the need of quality, somewhat irrelevant.

(E) The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined signifi cantly since 1930.
-- Incorrect. This supports the argument in a sense that if the apprenticeship time is low, then manufacturers will get shorter time to master the art.

please post the OA.

Thanks,
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:43 pm
Thanked: 15 times
Followed by:1 members

by mehrasa » Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:00 pm
OA is D.. but i also think B is the best among choices..
any expert opinion?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:6 members

by gunjan1208 » Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:22 pm
Hey,
I am not expert but its easy to reach D.

Let us first negate B:
Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE PART WE WANT TO PROVE....ACOOMODATION IN A HOTEL AND CARPENTARY WORK.....DO YOU THINK THIS IS THE REASON? THIS IS LIKE CORELATING SOMEBODY'S BAD WRITING BECASUE HE/SHE READS FROM A BOOK CONTAINING EVERYTHING IN CURSIVE LETTERS :D
Choice D means that If good carpentary work is not prone to be demolished or broken, thAT would sustain....Which means the work which did not have superior quality would have been demolished.....The conclusion is that even in the past there were building which did not have good carpentary work but they got demolished.....So now when you compare, you compare current work to the excellent work of the past....Which is apple and oranges....


HTH
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:49 am
Location: Delhi
Thanked: 6 times

by ranjeet75 » Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:32 am
I think that the answer should be E

E says that the length of apprenticeship has declined and therefore if skill, care and effort remains same, the quality must have declined due to lack of time.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1