Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 22 Aug 2014, 00:14

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Guidebook writer : I have visited hotels throughout the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Posts: 42
Location: Leeds
Schools: SBS, JBS(ding w/o interview), HEC
WE 1: SCI-12 yrs
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 5

Guidebook writer : I have visited hotels throughout the [#permalink] New post 12 May 2010, 03:33
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (01:06) wrong based on 1 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.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA: D

I came across this question in OG and at many other places. How does the answer(see spoiler) weaken the argument? Please elaborate. I don't see any of those as weakening the argument.
Thanks
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2008
Posts: 1477
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 193 [0], given: 31

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR/Weaken [#permalink] New post 12 May 2010, 04:39
ajitsah 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 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.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA: D

I came across this question in OG and at many other places. How does the answer(see spoiler) weaken the argument? Please elaborate. I don't see any of those as weakening the argument.
Thanks


The argument is saying that carpenters before 1930 are more talented than carpenters after 1930 based on his visits to older hotels. However, in D, it is saying that hotels with bad quality carpentry typically get demolished. In other words, if there was a hotel with bad carpentry prior to 1930, the hotel is probably demolished. The argument is making a conclusion based on observation. The writer is only visiting hotels with good carpentry because the ones with bad carpentry have been demolished.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 956
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 53

Kudos [?]: 690 [0], given: 40

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR/Weaken [#permalink] New post 12 May 2010, 05:25
Already discussed.

cr-set-23-q2-53053.html
_________________

Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Posts: 42
Location: Leeds
Schools: SBS, JBS(ding w/o interview), HEC
WE 1: SCI-12 yrs
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 5

Re: CR/Weaken [#permalink] New post 12 May 2010, 06:04
lagomez wrote:
ajitsah 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 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.
[Reveal] Spoiler:
OA: D

I came across this question in OG and at many other places. How does the answer(see spoiler) weaken the argument? Please elaborate. I don't see any of those as weakening the argument.
Thanks


The argument is saying that carpenters before 1930 are more talented than carpenters after 1930 based on his visits to older hotels. However, in D, it is saying that hotels with bad quality carpentry typically get demolished. In other words, if there was a hotel with bad carpentry prior to 1930, the hotel is probably demolished. The argument is making a conclusion based on observation. The writer is only visiting hotels with good carpentry because the ones with bad carpentry have been demolished.


Thank you very much, this is better than any other explanation given elsewhere, better than even the ones posted in the above link. Great.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR/Weaken [#permalink] New post 12 May 2010, 19:07
D says "The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished".

The same would be applicable to buildings after 1930.
Nowhere does he state that this applies only to building before 1930..

Please let me know your thoughts.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 05 Mar 2008
Posts: 1477
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 193 [0], given: 31

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR/Weaken [#permalink] New post 13 May 2010, 04:51
FedX wrote:
D says "The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished".

The same would be applicable to buildings after 1930.
Nowhere does he state that this applies only to building before 1930..

Please let me know your thoughts.


This can be true, but the question asks for an answer that weakens and only D weakens from the choices available
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 175
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 10

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR/Weaken [#permalink] New post 15 May 2010, 04:38
i would like to exxplain in slightly diffrent manner
prior to 1930 the buildings included both good and bad carpentry, but the bad carpentry fell into disuse and demolished and good one remained there,
now in mordern days there are good and bad carpentry and the guidebook writer is comparing good and bad carpentry of mordern times to the good carpentry before 1930
hencethe this comparision is awkward hende D is the ans
Re: CR/Weaken   [#permalink] 15 May 2010, 04:38
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the gregspirited 13 29 Nov 2007, 03:45
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the circkit 9 27 Jun 2007, 05:13
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the gamjatang 6 28 Dec 2005, 05:03
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the nakib77 19 17 Dec 2005, 10:34
Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the drdas 7 03 Oct 2004, 17:37
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Guidebook writer : I have visited hotels throughout the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.