aditya8062 wrote:
Quote:
(E) A focus on food and a focus on décor are mutually exclusive. whether they are mutually exclusive or not does not explain the conclusion.
this is not entirely true!!
in fact the conclusion that u have marked is not actually the conclusion of the argument
the fact is : Too many restaurants today focus on décor, atmosphere, and needlessly fancified menu descriptions:
the conclusion is that
such focus often comes at the expense of attention to delicious food, the primary reason for a restaurant’s existence.
now the problem with E is that it becomes too extreme to explain this argument :the fact that
such focus comes at the expense of attention to delicious food does not mean
that these two sets are mutually exclusive
but I think you didn't pay attention that the first part of the argument is a set of facts and a minor general judgement at the part of "a focus that often comes at the expense of attention to delicious food, the primary reason for a restaurant’s existence." however, these parts have general perspective. and the reasoning in this part is quite sound.
but the last line is where the the main judgement of the Restauranteur comes into light with "When I hear of a restaurant offering “lapsang souchong-cured portabella gravlax”, for example, I know one restaurant I can cross off my list of potential competitors" that is a conditional reasoning.. and whenever we have conditional reasoning the assumption always always defends the necessary condition.
for identifying the real conclusion you can add "since" at the beginning of the premise and "therefore" at the beginning of the conclusion. if it makes sense then you can be sure that the conclusion is the real one.
if we implement this technique to your comments it will be:
since "Too many restaurants today focus on décor, atmosphere, and needlessly fancified menu descriptions" therefore "such focus often comes at the expense of attention to delicious food, the primary reason for a restaurant’s existence". which does not make sense, but consider the following reasoning:
since "Too many restaurants today focus on décor, atmosphere, and needlessly fancified menu descriptions: a focus that often comes at the expense of attention to delicious food, the primary reason for a restaurant’s existence", therefore "When I hear of such restaurant, I know one restaurant I can cross off my list of potential competitors".
or if we make a mere change in the order of the facts it would make better sense:
since the primary reason for a restaurant’s existence is to offer delicious food and since Too many restaurants today focus on décor, atmosphere, and needlessly fancified menu descriptions, therefore When I hear of such restaurant, I know one restaurant I can cross off my list of potential competitors.
but I agree that your explanation about choice E is also true.
hope it helps.