Verbal Set doubt

[pre_gmat]

COuld someone explain the reasoning in the CR below?

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.

[givemeanid]

The main argument is 'quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to that in hotels built afterward'.

Only D states that the reason building is likely to not fall if it was one of the better quality buildings. Think of it like this: there were a lot of buildings built before 1930s. However, the only ones that would survive are the one that were built better.

To give you another analogy, everybody remembers their favorite 80s and 90s songs and keeps saying that quality of music (and musicians) has declined since then. However, people only remember the good songs and forget the fact that there were equally (if not more) crappy songs back in the day.

[mbagrad]

givemeanid, I have to differ from you on this one.

In my opinion, D trys to equate 'quality of the original carpentry' to the likelyhood of building being demolished, but it doesn't give any other reason to weaken guidebook writer's opinion.

I think the correct answer is 'E' because it gives another reason behind better quality of artwork in old building. Its because of decrease in avg. length of apprenticeship that has caused this descripancy and not that 'Old carpenters worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently'

[givemeanid]

E, if nothing else, will strengthen the argument, not weaken it.

[kevinspain]

givemeanid, I have to differ from you on this one.

In my opinion, D trys to equate 'quality of the original carpentry' to the likelyhood of building being demolished, but it doesn't give any other reason to weaken guidebook writer's opinion.

I think the correct answer is 'E' because it gives another reason behind better quality of artwork in old building. Its because of decrease in avg. length of apprenticeship that has caused this descripancy and not that 'Old carpenters worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently'

E sheds light on why current carpenters may work with less skill- their apprenticeships were shorter- and thus does not weaken the argument. D shows us that the pre-1930 buildings still standing are not a representative sample of all such buildings and thus should not be compared to modern ones

[mbagrad]

Thanks for your kind input guys. I think I fell into GMAT trap.

[vjman999]

ARGUMENT
Premise: the quality of the original carpentry work is generally superior to
that in hotels built afterward.
Conclusion: Carpenters working on hotels before 1930 typically
worked with more skill, care, and effort than carpenters who have worked on hotels built subsequently.
Assumption: Quality is related directly to skill of workers.
To weaken: Show something else caused the quality to go down.

D. The better the quality of original carpentry in a building, the less likely that building is to fall into disuse and be demolished.

May be...but does it say anywhere in the argument that there are quite a number of buildings standing form 1930's. No it does not.

E. The average length of apprenticeship for carpenters has declined significantly since 1930.

This one is CORRECT. It states that its not the difference of skill in workers that affected the quality but the number of workers doing apprenticeship has decreased. Hence the number of workers decreased in general affecting the quality.

[pre_gmat]

OA is D

[jpwindsurfer]

what is the oa?

[hmithu]

IMO E. Because, E provides n alternative reason which might have caused the inferior work with equal (or even more) skill, care, and effort