To classify a wok of art as truly great, it is necessary that the wok

Ahh. Great question testing Sufficient and Necessary Assumptions. LSAT favorite.
Let's understand the difference.

What is a Sufficient Assumption? Literally, an assumption that would guarantee that a conclusion follows logically.
What is a Necessary Assumption? Literally, an assumption that is required for the conclusion to follow logically.

e.g.
Club Bouncer: Only people above the age of 21 are allowed to enter.
BB's age is 25. BB can enter the club.

Sounds right? Yes... No...?
The argument doesn't follow logically from the support because "BB's being above 21" is NECESSARY for the argument but is it SUFFICIENT? What if the club doesn't allow Stags, What is BB's dress code is not proper, etc.

Similarly, in the main argument
To classify as truly great art, NECESSARY- Originality, and Influence. (Not Sufficient)

B and C are the only options relevant to the question.

in C,

Originality + Impact(influence) is NECESSARY but not SUFFICIENT.
What if the Drumming practice is original and has an impact but in a controversial way. Would it be TRULY GREAT? No, right!
So, C is wrong.

Now in B,

Here, one of the NECESSITIES is absent and hence the art CANNOT be considered truly great.
Absolutely CORRECT.

Thanks and regards,
Sri!

IMO the correct answer is B.


(A) By breaking down traditional schemes of representation, Picasso redefined painting. It is this extreme originality that warrants his work being considered truly great.

Only the originality aspect has been spoken of.

(B) Some of the most original art being produced today is found in isolated communities, but because of this isolation these works have only minor influence, and hence cannot be considered truly great.

For a painting to be truly great, two aspects are required. So, if it doesn't meet one of the two aspects it can't be truly great.
Hence correct choice.


(C) Certain examples of the drumming practiced in parts of Africa’s west coast employ a musical vocabulary that resists representation in Western notational schemes. This tremendous originality, coupled with the profound impact these pieces are having on musicians everywhere, is enough to consider these works to be truly great.

We don't know the other attributes that are required for a piece of music to be truly great.



(D) The piece of art in the lobby is clearly not classified as truly great, so it follows that it fails to be original.

Opposite has not been stated.

(E) Since Bach’s music is truly great, it not only has both originality and a major influence on musicians, it has broad popular appeal as well.

Popular appeal not spoken.

Posted from my mobile device

Could you please explain what is wrong with c as it has both originality and profound impact on musicians every where.

Could you please explain what is wrong with c as it has both originality and profound impact on musicians every where.

Hi. The third answer is very appealing because it contains the words originality and the mention of profound impact. However, there is no guarantee that "resisting representation in Western notational schemes" means originality. It doesn't mention if the musical vocabulary borrows from somewhere other than the west. Hope this helps.

I am not at all satisfied with the explanation.In order to make the option c Incorrect we are giving any reasioning.

for a work of art to be classified as truly great, the work should have

1- Originality
2- far-reaching influence upon the artistic community.


There may be some mandatory criterion that are required to classify a work as truly great.
Therefore, it is not necessary to classify a work of art as truly great if work meets the above two criterion.

In option C, drumming practiced in parts of Africa’s west coast meets both the above two criterion. But it may fail to meet some other mandatory criterion for which we do not have any information. Therefore, option C is incorrect.

Hope this helps.

The reasoning logic involved is the question is NECESSARY CONDITION vs SUFFICIENT CONDITION
Option B is correct because it stays inside the scope : things that are necessary for an art to be classified as truly great.
But option C goes beyond the scope : things required other than necessary condition to classify something as truly great.
We don’t have any information on sufficient condition so option C can be eliminated.

Posted from my mobile device

Difference between B and C comes down to is Influence and Impact mean the same thing

This question is very easy once one understands the concept of contrapostive. It goes like this: if A -> B, then we have (not B) -> (not A)

Back to the stem, we have: great art -> original AND big influence. Therefore, we also must have: Lacking either original or influence or both - > not great art. Only B follows this logic.

I saw lots of people pick C, which is a classic trap in the GMAT known as the converse trap. It goes like this: if we have A->B, then we CANNOT have B->A. In C, it goes exactly like that: original + big influence -> great art, which is clearly wrong.
_________________

GMATNinja - can you please explain why B is wrong? Thank you

If I say, getting an admission into HBS requires a score of 730 in GMAT. This is a necessary condition, but is this sufficient condition? No, there could be many other additional conditions such as interviews, SOP, work experience, etc.

So, the option C says ''enough'' which means ''sufficient''. It is necessary, we can't comment if it is sufficient, thus Option C is wrong.

For the sake of simplicity, we can understand ''necessary'' condition as ''MINIMUM ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA'', whereas ''SUFFICIENT'' or ''ENOUGH'' would mean ''Overall criteria'' to be met.

Regards
Vighnesh

To classify a work of art as truly great, it is necessary that the wok have both originality and far-reaching influence upon the artistic community.

The principle above, if valid, most strongly supports which one of the following arguments?


(A) By breaking down traditional schemes of representation, Picasso redefined painting. It is this extreme originality that warrants his work being considered truly great. - WRONG. What does the red text stand for? Does it mean that it had influence on wider artistic communities? This is where this option loses out.

(B) Some of the most original art being produced today is found in isolated communities, but because of this isolation these works have only minor influence, and hence cannot be considered truly great. - CORRECT. Contra side of the argument truly represented.

(C) Certain examples of the drumming practiced in parts of Africa’s west coast employ a musical vocabulary that resists representation in Western notational schemes. This tremendous originality, coupled with the profound impact these pieces are having on musicians everywhere, is enough to consider these works to be truly great. - WRONG. First, i have a problem with the word 'enough'. Second, the option itself limits the reach of the drumming.

(D) The piece of art in the lobby is clearly not classified as truly great, so it follows that it fails to be original. - WRONG. What about the influence. Not covered in this option. Hence wrong.

(E) Since Bach’s music is truly great, it not only has both originality and a major influence on musicians, it has broad popular appeal as well. - WRONG. The timeline point of view is extended here in this choice. It goes in a direction that is irrelevant to the argument by broadening/widening the scope of the argument i.e. what that art-form is at present. Present status is not concerned.

Answer B.
_________________

That would be very challenging -- (B) is the right answer.

If you have any questions about why (B) is correct, let us know!
_________________

My apologies, I meant to write why is C wrong? I can appreciate the logic behind why B is right, but can't wrap my head around why C is wrong. Thank you very kindly!

No worries! The passage tells us that for a work of art to be truly great, it is NECESSARY that it meets two criteria. Even if the work has a ton of other awesome attributes, it can't be great unless it meets both of the criteria listed in the passage.

That's different than saying that every single piece of art that DOES meet those criteria IS truly great. Sure, those pieces meet the minimum requirements -- but is that enough? We just don't know.

Consider this example: let say that, to take trombone lessons, you NEED to be at least six years old. Does that mean that every child who meets that requirement (i.e., is 6 or older), takes trombone?

Nope. Even if those kids meet the minimum requirements, there's no guarantee that they take trombone lessons.

(C) has the same issue: it describes a work of art that meets the minimum requirements listed in the passage. However, that doesn't guarantee that we have enough "to consider these works to be truly great."

(C) is not supported by the passage, so we can eliminate (C).

I hope that helps!
_________________

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________