bhavya4793 wrote:
GMATNinja My reason for rejecting option D was that the buildings built after 1930 should also be diuse and demolished which is not the case as per the passage. The lower quality buildings built after 1930 are still standing. This violates the established premise. Why the carpentry skill only valid for pre-1930 hotels and not after 1930 hotels.
Let's take another look at D.
Quote:
(D) The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.
So if the quality of original carpentry is lower in a building, then that building is
more likely to fall into disuse. However, this choice
does not say that a building with low quality carpentry will immediately fall into disuse upon being built.
Imagine that we build one group of buildings with low quality carpentry and, at the same exact time, another group of buildings with high quality carpentry:
- After 10 years, perhaps all of the buildings are still standing.
- After 20 years, perhaps 1 building from the low-quality group has fallen, while all of the buildings from the high-quality group still stand.
- With each passing decade, it becomes more and more likely that a building from the low-quality group will fall into disuse and be demolished.
- After a century, maybe a couple buildings from the high-quality group have been demolished, while most buildings in the low-quality group have been demolished.
Coming back to the argument, perhaps some of the low-quality, post-1930 hotels have already been demolished. But it is certainly possible that many of the newer low-quality hotels are still standing.
And when we consider a group of low-quality hotels built before 1930 vs. a group of low-quality hotels built after 1930, odds are that a higher percentage of the pre-1930 group has fallen into disuse over time. This would certainly skew the data observed by the writer.
As I've written earlier, we cannot PROVE that this is the case. But by providing an alternative explanation for the writer's observations, choice (D) certainly weakens the author's argument.
bhavya4793 wrote:
I choose option E because it says that the average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined and this may be the reason for less skill but the apprentice may be putting and effort in their work but due to less training they might able to make quality material. I know my reasoning is flawed because it only weakens a part of the conclusion and not the whole conclusion and that weakener still depends on an assumption. But compared to option D, this choice seems more plausible.
Here's choice (E) again:
Quote:
(E) The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.
Sure, no part of this choice tells us about the carpenters' amount of care and effort. But apprenticeship is where carpenters develop skills, and carpenters' skills are still part of the conclusion. So If the average length of post-1930 apprenticeships are shorter, then we're more inclined to accept the conclusion than reject it. This may not prove the conclusion, but it definitely doesn't
weaken the conclusion. Without more information, (E) is more likely to strengthen the argument than weaken it.
This is why (D) creates much more doubt about the conclusion than (E). I hope this helps!
_________________
GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | Instagram | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs
Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction
YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset
SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS
Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?
Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
close
