一道prep2 17的题，哪位牛能帮忙解释下啊

At present the Hollywood Restaurant
has only standard-height tables. 
However, many customers come to watch the celebrities who frequent the
Hollywood, and they would prefer tall tables with stools because such seating would
afford a better view of the celebrities.  Moreover, diners seated on stools typically do not stay as
long as diners seated at standard-height tables.  Therefore, if the Hollywood replaced some of its seating
with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

The argument is vulnerable to criticism
on the grounds that it gives reason to believe that it is likely that

(A) some celebrities come to the
Hollywood to be seen, and so might choose to sit at the tall tables if they
were available

(B) the price of meals ordered by
celebrities dining at the Hollywood compensates for the longer time, if any,
they spend lingering over their meals

(C) a customer of the Hollywood who
would choose to sit at a tall table would be an exception to the generalization
about lingering

(D) a restaurant's customers who spend
less time at their meals typically order less expensive meals than those who
remain at their meals longer

(E) with enough tall tables to
accommodate all the Hollywood's customers interested in such seating, there
would be no view except of other tall tables

题目是这样，正确答案是c，但是我怎么都看不懂啊，我总觉得d是正确的，有哪位大牛能帮忙给梳理下？万分感谢，万分感谢啊……

这道题的关键在于理解问的问题的意思：餐馆在这个论点中的哪个假设最容易受到批评者的攻击？D)选项可以做为批评者的依据，但显然不是餐馆方面在作出这个建议时的假设。

难道题目问的是 题目中做出的一系列假设哪个是不容易成立的...?

呃...

看了N个讨论帖都没有信服的答案

牛牛现身吧~~~~~~~~~

这道题问题真是很绕...到底问什么啊...

顺便一问，逻辑prep也有汇总么？能给个链接么？感激~

有个很迷茫的地方，到底换凳子后客人是带的时间长还是短？根据前面说客人能更好的看见名人，应该多待会吧...后面说的do not stay as long as ,到底是longer 还是shorter,这个题好几个地方分不清方向...题目里面的it是指criticism把？

我的简单理解是，现在只有高椅子，客人喜欢；坐矮椅的比高椅的时间短。所以，换了高桌矮椅，客人呆的时间就少了，就多赚钱了

削弱：就是吃饭的也想鹤立鸡群阿，所以喜欢高桌。