prep2-17

Gail小M

17At 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

有一点明白，但不是特别清楚，希望能帮忙解释的清楚些。
answer：C

sdcar2010

The answer is C.

First of all, this is a paradox question and the question stem asks you to find the criticism.  So let's analyze the argument.

Premises:
1) Customers come to Hollywood Restaurant to watch the celebrities so customrs would prefer tall tables to get a better view.
2) Diners seated on stools typically stay a shorter time than diners on regular seats.

Conclusion:
If the Hollywood replaced some of its seating with high tables and stools, its profits would increase.

Basically, the argument says that stools would attract more customers and customers sitting on stools turn over quickly.  Therefore, profits would be up.  Wait a minute.  Based on premise 1, if the customers are attracted to the restaraunt because they want to see celebrities, shouldn't they stay LONGER than normal customers? If so, it runs contrary to premise 2 which describes a general trend in customer's lingering behavior. The customer attracted might sit on the stools for a LONNNNNNNNNNNNNNG time without spending much on food. No turnover, no money!

C points out this paradox and C is the correct answer.

Gail小M

O(∩_∩)O谢谢！

dreamistrue

来餐厅吃饭的人想坐高凳子因为可以看明星；并且，在高凳子上吃饭的人比普通凳子上吃饭的人呆的时间短。 所以，把普通凳子都换成高凳子可以增加利润。  （潜台词就是说，换成高凳子以后大家坐不住，呆一会就快快走了，这样就能快点有空位子腾出来给别的顾客，顾客循环加速，更多的人能有机会坐那吃饭，所以利润就上来了）。 但是这个理由是站不住脚的，因为来这家餐厅吃饭的人都想做高凳子看明星，所以他们不符合普通的那个定论，即使做了高凳子也不会走的快，所以利润不会增加。