Ritwick91 wrote:
Can anybody please explain the QUESTION in details? I am unable to understand the question itself.
Ritwick91 Happy to help.
Quote:
A museum directors, in order to finance expensive new acquisitions, discreetly sold some paintings by major artists. All of them were paintings that the director privately considered inferior. Critics roundly condemned the sale, charging that the museum had lost first-rate pieces, thereby violating its duty as a trustee of art for future generations. A few months after being sold by the museum, those paintings were resold, in an otherwise stagnant art market, at two to three times the prices paid to the museum. Clearly, these prices settle the issue, since they demonstrate the correctness of the critics’s evaluation.
The reasoning in the argument is vulnerable to the criticism that the argument does which one of the following?The background context of this argument is:
[*] Museum directors need money so they sold the "not so great" paintings.
[*] Critics were mad about this move, saying they lost "first-rate pieces".
[*] Painting got resold "at two to three times the price paid" (Oh, sounds the critics are going to equate price to quality!)
[*] CLEARLY, "prices settle the issue".
The question stem asks us to ATTACK the "reasoning in the argument." What does the argument say? The critic’s argue that because the resale price of this art was super higher, therefore, their evaluation of that art as “first-rate” must be true. Their faulty belief/conclusion is
price is indicative of quality. A flaw in this reasoning is that the critics assume is the cause and effect relationship. If this was a weaken question, a possible answer choice would likely be an “incomplete information answer” or one that sheds evidence that price doesn’t indicate quality. Or that shares the possibility that art prices are heavily influenced by the economy.
Quote:
(A) It concludes that a certain opinion is correct on the grounds that it is held by more people than hold the opposing views.
This answer choice tells us that popular opinions are correct. We don’t know if the critics outnumber of the directors. Also, we are certain this is a causality error!
Quote:
(B) It rejects the judgment of the experts in an area in which there is no better guide to the truth than expert judgment.
Is museum director or the critic the expert judgement? Hm, are we sure there is “no better guide”?
Quote:
(C) It rejects a proven means of accomplishing an objective without offering any alternative means of accomplishing that objective.
There was not objective to be accomplished.
Quote:
(D) It bases a firm conclusion about a state of affairs in the present on somewhat speculative claims about a future state of affairs.
We never discussed a present v. future state of affairs.
Quote:
(E) It bases its conclusion on facts that could, in the given situation, have resulted from causes other than those presupposed by the argument.
Ah, this sounds like our pre-think. Yes, what if the market influences prices? _________________
.
"What you do in practice determines your level of success. I used to tell my players: You have to give 100% everyday. Whatever you don't give, you can't make it up tomorrow."