PREP07-CR2-17

windconniewj

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





answer:C  求解释，我选D

jane.seeker

我认为对问题的理解应该是：从文章给出的论据中可以推导出什么来削弱论点，也就是同因反果，而并不是让你去补充一个论据去削弱论点

xiqiong

原文说的是：
饭店要换桌子是因为按常理人呆的时间会少了。所以利润会上升。
但是，因为中间有很多断层，所以我们不能妄自加条件。
C说的是，这家饭店的顾客在呆的时间上不符合常理。  那么直接否定了plan成功的前提条件。OK的。
D说的是，停留的时间段了花的钱少，但是，因为我们不知道吃饭的批次，所以不能直接得出plan是否成功。
遇到这种题目，就是premise和conclusion之间有gap的， 直接找premise，能否定premise的就是正确答案~

windconniewj

xiqiong 发表于 2013-8-12 10:45
原文说的是：
饭店要换桌子是因为按常理人呆的时间会少了。所以利润会上升。
但是，因为中间有很多断层，所 ...

太精辟了，谢谢