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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
In Episode 4 of our GMAT Ninja CR series, we tackle the most intimidating CR question type: Boldface & "Legalese" questions. If you've ever stared at an answer choice that reads, "The first is a consideration introduced to counter a position that...
Looking for your GMAT motivation to break through the score plateau? Pragati improved her score by massive 160 points with strategic guidance and hard-work! Find out how personalized mentorship and a strong mindset can turn GMAT struggles into success.
Most GMAT test-takers are intimidated by the hardest GMAT Verbal questions. In this session, Target Test Prep GMAT instructor Erika Tyler-John, a 100th percentile GMAT scorer, will show you how top scorers break down challenging Verbal questions..
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
100%
(01:44)
correct 0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 6
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
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
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
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
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
At first I was thinking about E, but this one strengthens the argument.
Thinking more about it, yes it is D, even if initially I eliminated that answer.
Can you explain how. I feel D is strengthening.
It explains" better the qualite ; less likely will it eb demolished". The writer is staying in such hotels constructed in 1930 which indicates they are not demolished and hence are better. If not better that the current ones ; they are still good. How does it weaken??????????
Can you explain how. I feel D is strengthening. It explains" better the qualite ; less likely will it eb demolished". The writer is staying in such hotels constructed in 1930 which indicates they are not demolished and hence are better. If not better that the current ones ; they are still good. How does it weaken??????????
Show more
The passage concludes that carpenters were better in the 1930s, because houses surviving from that period are of higher quality than today's houses. But if all the houses that survived were the best quality houses, then maybe the carpenters back then, on the whole, weren't any better than today's--it's just that all the 1930s bad carpenters had their houses fall apart in the meantime, so we don't see them today. In other words, D tells us that all we see are the best houses from that period, so we can't draw conclusions about the quality of the houses as a whole.
(It's as if, when asked to send a random sample of students to be examined for a school assessment, a principal arranged instead to send the top 10 students. The assessors would think the school was really great--but it's really just the principal gaming the system.)
Can you explain how. I feel D is strengthening. It explains" better the qualite ; less likely will it eb demolished". The writer is staying in such hotels constructed in 1930 which indicates they are not demolished and hence are better. If not better that the current ones ; they are still good. How does it weaken??????????
The passage concludes that carpenters were better in the 1930s, because houses surviving from that period are of higher quality than today's houses. But if all the houses that survived were the best quality houses, then maybe the carpenters back then, on the whole, weren't any better than today's--it's just that all the 1930s bad carpenters had their houses fall apart in the meantime, so we don't see them today. In other words, D tells us that all we see are the best houses from that period, so we can't draw conclusions about the quality of the houses as a whole.
(It's as if, when asked to send a random sample of students to be examined for a school assessment, a principal arranged instead to send the top 10 students. The assessors would think the school was really great--but it's really just the principal gaming the system.)
At first I was thinking about E, but this one strengthens the argument. Thinking more about it, yes it is D, even if initially I eliminated that answer.
Show more
True, E strengthens it. It explains why pre-1930s carpenters were more skilled. It boils down to D ultimately.
I still have a problem with option D. This is because it doesn't explain why the quality of the carpentry after the 1930's is worst than that of the carpentry before the 1930's. According to option D, if indeed the better the quality of the carpentry, the less likely that such buildings would be demolished, then how come that didn't happen to the buildings after the 1930's?
If people have kept only the good quality buildings throughout these years, then shouldn't we rather see only the good quality carpentry in the buildings in both before and after the 1930's? Option D doesn't even imply that such a practice was done only to the buildings before the 1930's, so it means that we can also apply it to the buildings after the 1930's. If so, then this option rather strengthens the argument because by keeping only the best quality buildings made after the 1930's, those buildings are still worst than the buildings made before the 1930's. So the argument is strengthened.
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. -> out of scope since this talks about comparing hotels with other monuments B. Hotels built since 1930 can generally accommodate more guests than those built before 1930. -> this weakens since it says post 1930 built hotels accomodate more people suggesting that the hotels are comfortable C. The materials available to carpenters working before 1930 were not significantly different in quality from the materials available to carpenters working after 1930. -> when materials arte of same qualiuty then doubt comes on skill set of workers hence this favours the argument eliminate D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished. -> out of scope this discusses consequences of better carpentry quality E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930 -> this strengthens saying that post 1930 the workers were of lower skill could not learn more
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
Show more
IMO B)
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.