Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Jul 2014, 10:24

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2007, 03:09
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
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.

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.

OA is E

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 them 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.

OA is A
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 299
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2007, 04:29
We have a clear E here.

The argument is about the nature of personal ownership. Who really owns what. Does a work of art belong to society, or does it belong to the legal owner.

E is the only one that deals with Shanna's case which is, personal ownership trumps societies ownership...Shanna is clearly not a communist.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

2nd Q [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2007, 04:58
Defenestrate - what about the second question? whats your answer & logic?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 275
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 29 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2007, 05:49
S - owners have the right to distroy any artwork - distasteful, or no time to take care of it
J - Owners can posses but not destroy. Preserve it regardless of what the owner thinks.

E - Good one - Supports the fact that the individual is the autonomous decision maker and that should not be compromised.
D - Against - No one has absolute rights of ownership over certain entities...
C - Irrelevant
B - Out of Scope
A - Out of Scope

E - BEST ANSWER
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

2nd? [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2007, 06:55
AXL -> how about the second one?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 212
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR [#permalink] New post 16 Mar 2007, 19:41
Second one is tricky.
At first I got E, which is incorrect. Because Shanna insists "...if they find morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient...", "tired", in E, is not included.
However, in A, "in an unflattering light " fits.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 754
Location: Dallas, Texas
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 17 Mar 2007, 00:30
If you post the answer, you will never see a good debate or discussion.

(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.

CORRECT - They are arguing whether a person has the right to destroy a work of art whenever he/she wishes for whatever reasons.

(B) People who own aesthetically valuable works of art have no moral obligation to make them available for public viewing.

They are not talking about public access.

(C) Valuable paintings by well-known artists are seldom intentionally damaged or destroyed by their owners.

Not arguing how often well-known artists' works are destroyed intentionally.

(D) If a piece of sculpture is not unique, its owner has no ethical obligation to preserve it if doing so proves burdensome.

They are arguing about the right to destroy any owrk of art irrespective of its uniqueness

(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.

No discussion of "legal" stuff. debate is over moral and ethics.

_________________

"Education is what remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

2nd Q [#permalink] New post 17 Mar 2007, 02:27
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.

From the above discussion, it is clear that Jorge favors conservation of "unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value". He, however, has not expressed any POV on works of art that may not be unique, or which do not have aesthetic value. By no stretch of imagination can we infer that a "portrait presenting father in an unflattering light" is either aesthetic or carries some historic value. Hence Shanna and Jorge are unlikely to disagree on destroying the portrait. A cannot be the answer then.

Statement D is consistent with line of thinking of both Jorge and Shanna. Hence I feel D should be the answer, irrespective of what is given as OA 8-)
2nd Q   [#permalink] 17 Mar 2007, 02:27
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of joshnsit 7 24 Feb 2012, 05:33
6 The owner of an art shop conducts his business in the follow feruz77 8 21 Nov 2010, 05:24
A poem is any work of art that exploits some of the musical joemama142000 13 19 Jan 2010, 06:40
Any property owners here? olive 5 28 Jan 2009, 06:41
shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of srijay007 3 09 Sep 2004, 02:09
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.