|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1108
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
80
[0], given: 0
|
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the [#permalink]
 19 Jan 2008, 08:17
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Posts: 524
Schools: Harvard '11
Followers: 8
Kudos [?]:
62
[0], given: 28
|
Re: weaken cr question [#permalink]
19 Jan 2008, 08:28
I think D. D leads me to believe that both skilled and UNSKILLED carpenters existed before 1930, except all the hotels built by unskilled carpenters are now demolished because of poor quality, and only the good-carpentry buildings remain standing. So, all the writer sees are great-looking buildings from before 1930, but the truth is that the average carpenter before 1930 could've been just as bad as the average carpenter today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 07 Oct 2007
Posts: 20
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
Re: weaken cr question [#permalink]
19 Jan 2008, 08:30
One more D
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1108
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
80
[0], given: 0
|
Re: weaken cr question [#permalink]
19 Jan 2008, 11:18
Quad wrote: One more D D it is
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 793
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
82
[0], given: 0
|
Re: weaken cr question [#permalink]
19 Jan 2008, 23:34
Answer D
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 77
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 1
|
Re: weaken cr question [#permalink]
21 Jan 2008, 05:36
D for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 635
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
114
[0], given: 1
|
Re: weaken cr question [#permalink]
21 Jan 2008, 08:30
obviously D - survivorship bias.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: weaken cr question
[#permalink]
21 Jan 2008, 08:30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
