A major art theft from a museum was remarkable in that the pieces stol

A major art theft from a museum was remarkable in that the pieces stolen clearly had been carefully selected. The criterion for selection, however, clearly had not been greatest estimated market value. It follows that the theft was specifically carried out to suit the taste of some individual collector for whose private collection the pieces were destined.

A major theft was remarkable because of pieces selected. So, selected pieces can determine the type of theft - individual collector or random.

The argument tacitly appeals to which one of the following principles?

(A) Any art theft can, on the evidence of the selection of pieces stolen, be categorized as committed either at the direction of a single known individual or at the direction of a group of known individuals. - Here, known word is written which makes this wrong

(B) Any art theft committed at the direction of a single individual results in a pattern of works taken and works left alone that defies rational analysis. - It doesnt defy rational analysis. It is opposite of what the argument intends.

(C) The pattern of works taken and works left alone can sometimes distinguish one type of art theft from another. - Possible contender

(D) Art thefts committed with no preexisting plan for the disposition of the stolen works do not always involve theft of the most valuable pieces only. - Here, the theft mentioned is of no pre-existing plan but the argument has predicted about those plans which are pre planned because of type of pieces stolen.

(E) The pattern of works taken and works left alone in an art theft can be particularly damaging to the integrity of the remaining collection. - No mention of this in argument.

So, C is the answer.

(C)
On what does the author base his conclusion that the theft was carried out in order to add to the collection of a private collector? The only evidence available to the author is the selection of art works on the part of the thieves. The author must be relying on the principle described in (C): from the pattern of works taken (in this case, the works had been
“carefully selected,” but not on the basis of monetary worth), it is sometimes possible to distinguish one type of art theft from another (in this case, to perceive that a theft was carried out in order to please an individual collector).

(A) The author inferred that this theft was carried out to suit a private collector. He needn’t assume that whenever an art theft takes place (including thefts where only the most expensive pieces are stolen), he can tell whether one or many “known” individuals “directed” that theft.

(B) The author never claimed that the pattern evidenced by this theft “defied rational analysis;” in fact, since a very definite plan was evidently carried out, the opposite seems to be the case.

(D) Suppose, contrary to (D), that thefts without a preexisting plan for the disposition of the stolen works did uniformly involve the theft of only the most valuable pieces: that wouldn’t at all hurt the author’s argument that the failure to select the most valuable works in the case of this theft shows that there is a preexisting plan to get the works to a private collector. So (D) isn’t appealed to.

(E) The author never even mentions the “integrity” of the remaining collection, so he needn’t appeal to (E).

• The question asks, in effect, for a principle that is assumed by the argument. You can use the Denial Test on the choices, exactly as you do on assumption questions. Deny the “principle”; if the argument still holds, then the principle isn’t assumed or, as they put it here, is not “tacitly appealed to” by the argument. (Conversely, deny correct choice (C) and the argument falls apart.)

• Recognize the limitations of the author’s argument—he’s just saying that, in this particular unusual case, he can infer something about the theft. Avoid choices, like (A) and (B), that use absolute terms like “any” or “every.”

(A) Any art theft can, on the evidence of the selection of pieces stolen, be categorized as committed either at the direction of a single known individual or at the direction of a group of known individuals. Wrong. Art can be stolen by regular burglars as well - who might not work under the direction of any individual(s)

(B) Any art theft committed at the direction of a single individual results in a pattern of works taken and works left alone that defies rational analysis. Wrong. The theft is certainly rational and can be analyzed.

(C) The pattern of works taken and works left alone can sometimes distinguish one type of art theft from another. Correct. This is the central thrust of the argument - that based on the art work stolen , one can find the individual to whose collection the art work is destined for.

(D) Art thefts committed with no preexisting plan for the disposition of the stolen works do not always involve theft of the most valuable pieces only. Wrong. This is the opposite of what the paragraph says.

(E) The pattern of works taken and works left alone in an art theft can be particularly damaging to the integrity of the remaining collection. Wrong. This is completely tangential to the paragraph