Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Questions 24-25 shanna: Owners of any work of art, [#permalink]
12 Jan 2004, 19:45
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:49) wrong based on 2 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of ownership, ethically have the right to destroy that artwork if they find morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient.
jorge: Ownership of unique artworks, unlike ownership of other kinds of objects, carries the moral right to possess but not to destroy. A unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value belongs to posterity and so must be preserved. whatever the personal wishes of its legal owner.
24. Which one of the following principles, if accepted would contribute most to Shanna's defense of her position against that of Jorge?
(A) Truly great works of art are never morally or aesthetically distasteful to any serious student of the history of art.
(B) The right of future generations to have their artistic heritage preserved is of greater importance than the rights of any presently living individual.
(C) It would be imprudent to allow the present stock of artworks to be destroyed without some guarantee that the artists of the future will produce works as great as those produced in the past.
(D) There are certain entities over which no one would be ethically justified in claiming absolute rights to ownership.
(E) The autonomy of individuals to do what they wish with what is theirs must not be compromised, in the absence of a threat to anyone's health or safety.
25. On the basis of their statements, Shanna and Jorge are committed to disagreeing about the truth of which one of the following statements?
(A) Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or her father in an unflattering light would for that reason alone be ethically justified in destroying it.
(B) People who own aesthetically valuable works of art have no moral obligation to make then available for public viewing.
(C) Valuable paintings by well-known artists are seldom intentionally damaged or destroyed by their owners.
(D) If a piece of sculpture is not unique, its owner has no ethical obligation to preserve it if doing so proves burdensome.
(E) It is legally permissible for a unique and historically valuable mural to be destroyed by its owner if he or she tires of it.
[rss2posts title=The MBA Manual title_url=https://mbamanual.com/2016/11/22/mba-vs-mim-guest-post/ sub_title=MBA vs. MiM :3qa61fk6]Hey, guys! We have a great guest post by Abhyank Srinet of MiM-Essay . In a quick post and an...