欧美成人观看免费全部完,麻豆亚洲av成人无码久久精品

題庫解析 > 題型 >

本題由2提供

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.

登錄申友雷哥GMAT，查看答案及解析

視頻解析

資深講師題題有解析

{{current}} / {{duration}}

登錄申友雷哥GMAT，查看完整視頻

文字解析

答案：

Argument Ev

aluation

Situation The original carpentry in hotels built before 1930 shows superior care, skill, and effort to that in hotels built after 1930. This leads to the conclusion that carpenters working on hotels before 1930 were superior in skill, care, and effort to those that came after.

Reasoning Which option most seriously weakens the argument? The argument draws an inference from a comparison between carpentry in hotels of different eras to a judgment about the carpenters working on hotels in those eras. One way to

weaken this inference is by finding some way in which the carpentry in the hotels may be unrepresentative of the skill, care, and effort of the carpenters

working in the eras. The comparison is between the carpentry evident in hotels of the two eras that still exist. Thus, if there is some reason to think that hotels with good carpentry survive longer than those with bad carpentry, then still- existing hotels from the older era will have disproportionately more good

carpentry, even assuming no difference between the skill, care, and effort of the carpenters from the two eras.

A. This option applies equally to both eras, so it has no bearing on the argument.

B. It is not clear whether carpenters working on larger hotels would exercise more, less,

or the same skill and care as those working on smaller hotels; thus this option does not weaken the argument.

C. The argument does not rely, even implicitly, on there being any difference in the quality of materials used in the two eras, so it does not weaken the argument to point out that no such difference exists.

D. Correct. This weakens the reasoning in the argument by showing a respect in which the comparison between existing hotels may be unrepresentative. Specifically, the

comparison may be unrepresentative in that still-existing hotels that were built prior to 1930 may well have been better built than most hotels built prior to 1930 were; the

hotels that did not have unusually high-quality carpentry work may have all fallen into disuse and been demolished.

E. The longer a carpenter works as an apprentice, the more skill he or she is apt to have upon becoming a full-fledged carpenter. So this option would tend to slightly

strengthen rather than weaken the argument.