#23 - Historians of North American architecture who have

[Bob O'Halloran]

Hi Nickp18,
Thank you for your question. You are correct! Answer choice (B) is a defender answer. The attack on the argument would be that narrow boards are significantly cheaper. (B) eliminates this line of attack. It still allows for the narrow boards to be a little cheaper because that would hurt the argument.
Please let us know if you have other questions.
Bob

[seanjae]

Dear Powerscore,

I'm getting a bit confused while reviewing this question. Is something along the lines of "the area which the floorboards were used does not differ significantly between bigger and smaller houses" the implicit assumption for this question? If so, how can I find it?
Without any premise similar to the one mentioned above, I cannot see how answer (B) could be correct. For all I know, floors could be made of things other than floorboards, and if it were the case that the area of floorboards used in bigger houses was smaller than its counterpart, then something like "narrow floorboards were extra expensive" would be the plausible answer and not (B). It seems I can't rule out that possibility just with the information given in the passage.
The only hint I got from the passage that could relate to the assumption I think is necessary is "early nineteenth century houses with wooden floors." Perhaps this implies that the floors of the houses mentioned in the passage are completely made out of floorboards? Then again, I think this is too vague a phrasing to mean that and I'm not really satisfied with it. This may be extreme, but just for the sake of it, if I used a single piece of wood (maybe not even a floorboard), I could still say I have a house with a wooden floor.
Maybe I'm thinking too much. Can you help me out?

Thank you in advance

[seanjae]

Dear Powerscore,

I'm getting a bit confused while reviewing this question. Is something along the lines of "the area which the floorboards were used does not differ significantly between bigger and smaller houses" the implicit assumption for this question? If so, how can I find it?
Without any premise similar to the one mentioned above, I cannot see how answer (B) could be correct. For all I know, floors could be made of things other than floorboards, and if it were the case that the area of floorboards used in bigger houses was smaller than its counterpart, then something like "narrow floorboards were extra expensive" would be the plausible answer and not (B). It seems I can't rule out that possibility just with the information given in the passage.
The only hint I got from the passage that could relate to the assumption I think is necessary is "early nineteenth century houses with wooden floors." Perhaps this implies that the floors of the houses mentioned in the passage are completely made out of floorboards? Then again, I think this is too vague a phrasing to mean that and I'm not really satisfied with it. This may be extreme, but just for the sake of it, if I used a single piece of wood (maybe not even a floorboard), I could still say I have a house with a wooden floor.
Maybe I'm thinking too much. Can you help me out?

Thank you in advance

I'm sorry, I think I should have said for my implied assumption something like:
"among bigger and smaller houses with floorboards, the area which the floorboards were used between the two were at least roughly equals"

[atierney]

Hi Sean,

The historians are saying that having narrower wooden floors meant having higher status. If you want to look rich (or were rich), then you would have a house with narrow wooden floors. Now, we're looking an answer choice that helps support this argument. Looking through the answers, there really isn't one that definitively helps "proves" the argument correct. Therefore, we switch our search to look for an answer choice that eliminates potential weaknesses in the argument. B does this by showing that it wasn't cheaper to use narrow wooden floors, i.e. you didn't install them to save money on your housing expense, and therefore indicating that you probably did so for other reasons, mainly the status symbol having them in your home provided.

Let me know if this is clear, and if you have any further questions.