Guidebook writer: I have visited hotels throughout the

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.
---out of scope
C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
---strengthens the argument
D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
---weakens by stating another reason why old hotels still exist
E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
---out of scope

D is the answer.

"D" is the answer.

He is arguing that carpentry was superior before 1930. Choice D weakens this arguement because it demonstrates that houses built before 1930 that are still standing were of the best quality of those built before 1930. Poorly built houses built before 1930 were demolished and hence cannot be viewed by the writer.

OA is D

a late D.

A) Irrelevant, we are not comparing carpentry of hotel to other structure.
B) Irrelevant - # of guests has nth to do with quality of carpentry
C) If anything, strengthen. if carpenter uses same material and quality differs, we are better able to correclate difference in quality to skill level of carpenter.
D) if better quality = low chance od demolishment. only high quality hotel will remain for a long time.
E) strengthen, provide reason why quality before and after 1930 differs.


D it is!

D. Survivorship bias.

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.
It is completely out of scope as we are not comparing with other structures.

B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930.
This option is also out of scope as accommodation of guests is irrelevant wrt topic in discussion.

C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930.
This option is actually a strengthener as it states that quality of materials has not deteriorated much

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 a weakener as it explains that if the quality of work was not good in 1930's,then the hotel would have been probably demolished.

E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
This option is actually a strengthener as it explains work done now by the carpenters is not as good as it was in 1930's

Correct Answer - D