A Famous Editor: American writers today lack skills that were common

Question

A Famous Editor: American writers today lack skills that were common among American writers of preceding centuries. I believe this because my analysis of 100 books, 50 old and 50 contemporary, demonstrates convincingly that none of the contemporary writings are executed as skillfully as the older writings.

Which of the following points to the most serious logical flaw in the Editor’s argument?

A.There could be criteria other than the technical skill of the writer by which to evaluate a book.
 B.The particular methods currently used by American writers could require less literary skill than do methods used by writers in other parts of the world.
 C.The editors fame could cause people to accept the editors thesis even without their reading the books to consider the validity of his thesis.
 D.An individual who was not familiar with the language of literary criticism might not be convinced by the editors analysis of the 100 books
 E.The books chosen for analysis could be those that most support his thesis.

Source: Crackverbal

balaji4799 · Answer

IMO the right answer is E. The entire conclusion is based only on the analysis of 100 books and nothing else. There is no guarantee that the selected books represent a good sample set to make that conclusion.

deepanjan0612 · Answer

Thanks for the answer. I was stuck in between A and E. The weightage of the answer in my case was more for E than for A but I dont understand how I can completely eliminate A. Is it because there is no mention of the word technical in the para?

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum

balaji4799 · Answer

Good point. I shall take a shot at addressing your point. 
IMO even if there is a different skill with which one could evaluate an authors, the Editor in the argument can still come to the same conclusion provided his selected books are representative ones. The entire argument crumbles if books aren't the right ones. 
Also, the key of the argument is on comparing the skills of older and newer writers but not on the what type of skills to compare with. 
So, I eliminated A considering it out of scope for the current argument.

TaN1213 · Answer

A talks about evaluating a book. The premise nowhere mentions that the editor was evaluating the book. The editor simply compares the SKILLS of old writers with those of contemporary writers. 
A is out of scope in terms of the Purpose (evaluation of book).

E rightly weakens the conclusion of editor by reversing the causality i.e. by doubting the sample itself.

push12345 · Answer

We should not select choice which is somehow talk about other factor
A mentions other reason whereas our intention is to find an choice which if true amkes it analysis in doubt

E is surely better than A in that regard

Posted from my mobile device

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

A Famous Editor: American writers today lack skills that were common

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A Famous Editor: American writers today lack skills that were common

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards