求助逻辑题

slamshady

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 signifi cantly 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 signifi cantly since 1930.

正确答案是D，但是OG后面的解释没看明白，请高人解答！

薇洋祈轩

A无关
B无关
C排除它因——加强
D呈现它因（好品质是因为有要求，不是因为技艺不精——如果没有好品质，容易坍塌）——削弱
E显示因果关系的资料有效（因为之前花更多的时间学艺，所以技艺精湛）——加强

slamshady

谢谢！是不是可以这样理解，1930年以前对造房子要求高，所以木匠活做得好，而1930年之后没要求了，做得就不如从前了？

薇洋祈轩

恩恩是这样~

slamshady

不知道是不是我水平有限，总觉得这一点很难想到啊。。。当初第一遍做得时候直接把这个选项排除了。。。

桃子教主

D项：1930以前建筑物中的木匠工艺越好，房子不用和倒塌的概率越小，就是说留到现在的房子都是质量较好的。
当然不能说是因为1930以前的木匠工艺好了，他们修的那些不好的早就不存在了。。。

slamshady

我明白了。。。其实它这里的逻辑问题还是比较的样本不一致。。。这个人所拜访的1930年以前造的hotel都是好的完整保留下来的，而1930以后的hotel就是有好有坏的，所以这样就没法比了。。。