A museum has been offered an undocumented statue, supposedly

Question

A museum has been offered an undocumented statue, supposedly Greek and from sixth century B.C. Possibly the statue is genuine but undocumented because it was recently unearthed or because it has been privately owned. However, an ancient surface usually has uneven weathering, whereas the surface of this statue has the uniform quality characteristically produced by a chemical bath used by forgers to imitate a weathered surface. Therefore, the statue is probably a forgery.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Museums can accept a recently unearthed statue only with valid export documentation from its country of origin.

(B) The subject’s pose and other aspects of the subject’s treatment exhibit all the most common features of Greek statues of the sixth century B.C.

(C) The chemical bath that forgers use was at one time used by dealers and collectors to remove the splotchy surface appearance of genuinely ancient sculptures.

(D) Museum officials believe that forgers have no technique that can convincingly simulate the patchy weathering characteristic of the surfaces of ancient sculptures.

(E) An allegedly Roman sculpture with a uniform surface similar to that of the statue being offered to the museum was recently shown to be a forgery.

TommyWallach · Accepted Answer

Hey All,

Lot of great conversation going on about this one, so I thought I'd weigh in and try to take it apart with technique. Let's see how it goes.

A museum has been offered an undocumented statue, supposedly Greek and from sixth century B.C. Possibly the statue is genuine but undocumented because it was recently unearthed or because it has been privately owned. However, an ancient surface usually has uneven weathering, whereas the surface of this statue has the uniform quality characteristically produced by a chemical bath used by forgers to imitate a weathered surface. Therefore, the statue is probably a forgery.

Conclusion: The statue is probably a forgery.

Premise: Undocumented, with an even surface more characteristic of forgery than a genuine antique

Assumption: There's no way a genuine antique could get that even surface

This is my assumption, and I promise I have yet to read the answer choices. As far as I can see, this is the major leap the argument makes. if there's some way a genuine antique could end up with that fake-looking surface, this could still be genuine.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Museums can accept a recently unearthed statue only with valid export documentation from its country origin.

PROBLEM: This doesn't relate to the authenticity of the statue at all. We only care about the surface.

(B) The chemical bath that forgers use was at one time used by dealers and collectors to remove the splotchy surface appearance of genuinely ancient sculptures.

ANSWER: This looks good, because it describes a reason a genuine antique might have ended up with the fake-looking surface.

(C) Museum officials believe that forgers have no technique that can convincingly simulate the patchy weathering characteristic of the surfaces of ancient sculptures.

PROBLEM: This would strengthen the argument slightly, because it implies that the uneven weathering is always going to be genuine.

(D) An allegedly Roman Sculpture with a uniform surface similar to that of the statue being offered to the museum was recently shown to be a forgery.

PROBLEM: This strengthens the argument pretty straightforwardly.

Hope that helps!

-t

sidhu4u · Answer

So, answer is C

semwal · Answer

PREMISE- 1.    A museum has been offered an undocumented statue, supposedly Greek and from sixth century B.C.

COUNTER PREMISE- 1 .  Possibly the statue is genuine but undocumented because it was recently unearthed or because it has been privately owned.

PREMISE 2.   - An ancient surface usually has uneven weathering, whereas the surface of this statue has the uniform quality characteristically produced by a chemical bath used by forgers to imitate a weathered surface.

CONCLUSION- Therefore, the statue is probably a forgery.

ASSUMPTION-  - 1. Uniform surface statue unlikely to be ancient....
 2. CHEMICAL BATH CAN WEATHER A SURFACE.........
 2. Uniform surface statue likely to have been forged.....

a weakener should weaken the assumption or conclusion...............CORRECT ANSWER SHOULD BRING OUT-----.THE STATUE IS UNLIKELY TO BE A FORGERY.....

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Museums can accept a recently unearthed statue only with valid export documentation from its country origin....  does not lead us to conclude that the statue is not a forgery... wrong

(B) The chemical bath that forgers use was at one time used by dealers and collectors to remove the splotchy surface appearance of genuinely ancient sculptures.  .....may be an evidence that the statue is not a forgery... can be CORRECT....

(C) Museum officials believe that forgers have no technique that can convincingly simulate the patchy weathering characteristic of the surfaces of ancient sculptures. ....SINCE the forgers cannot possibly simulate a splotchy appearance...may be the statue is not genuine........
(D) An allegedly Roman Sculpture with a uniform surface similar to that of the statue being offered to the museum was recently shown to be a forgery.  evidence to support conclusion

kinjiGC · Answer

Conclusion : the statue is probably a forgery
premise : an ancient surface usually has uneven weathering, whereas the surface of this statue has the uniform quality characteristically produced by a chemical bath used by forgers to imitate a weathered surface

Prethinking : Something that provides same finish but genuine.  
 
A) museum can accept a recently unearthed statue only with valid export documentation from its country of origin ->  OFS

B) the subject's pose and other aspects of the subject's treatment exhibit all the most common features of Greek statues of the sixth century BC ->  Doesn't invalidate the premise and hence conclusion. It does weaken the conclusion though.

C) the chemical bath that forgers use was at one time used by dealers and collectors to remove the splotchy surface appearance of genuinely ancient sculptures ->  Correct

D) museum officials believe that forgers have no technique that can convincingly simulate the patchy weathering characteristic of the surfaces of ancient sculptures ->  OFS

E) an allegedly roman sculpture with a uniform surface similar to that of the statue being offered to the museum was recently shown to be a forgery ->  Supports the conclusion

vnigam21 · Answer

The passage presents an argument that a particular statue is a forgery because its surface appears to have been given a chemical treatment that forgers typically use. We are then asked to identify the answer choice that weakens the argument.

If the treatment often used by forgers was also used by others on genuine antiquities, the argument that the statue is a forgery is weakened. Therefore choice C is the best answer.

Choice A  is not correct because information about  whether the museum can accept the statue is not relevant to the question of whether the statue is a forgery , which is the focus of the argument. Therefore, Irrelevant.

Since both genuine antiquities and forgeries would share the most common features , Choice B does not cast any doubt on the argument that the statue is a forgery. Also, if we notice more precisely, we can see that this  option B  weakens the conclusion but the premise on the basis of which the conclusion is made stands as it is. The reasoning of the premise which had lead to the conclusion is not invalidated. Therefore, Incorrect. But definitely a trap answer.

Choice D  indicates that a statue that showed uneven weathering would not be a forgery. Since the statue in question does not have uneven weathering, this choice leaves the argument unaffected, and is therefore incorrect. It slightly strengthens. Therefore, Incorrect.

Choice E  reinforces the possibility that the statue is a forgery, so does not weaken the argument.

stackskillz · Answer

This is the quick solution I came up with:

Conc: Statue has uniform weathering => The statue is probably a forgery.

(A)  Museums can accept a recently unearthed statue only with valid export documentation from its country of origin  - Whether museum can accept the statue based on valid export documentation tells us nothing about whether the statue is a forgery or not. This fact can co-exist with the conclusion above.  Drop .

(B)  The subject’s pose and other aspects of the subject’s treatment exhibit all the most common features of Greek statues of the sixth century B.C.  - IMO good trap answer, if you're confused and not looking at the conclusion and premises. This doesn't remove the doubt about the uniform weathering on which the conclusion is based.  Drop

(C)  The chemical bath that forgers use was at one time used by dealers and collectors to remove the splotchy surface appearance of genuinely ancient sculptures.  This option does weaken the assumption that the uniform weathering is enough to confirm whether the statue is a forgery. This information doesn't completely negate the fact the statue is a forgery or not. However, it does throw in a bit of wrench there, by suggesting the method was also used by collectors and dealers at one point in time. Given that we're told the statue was either recently unearthed or part of private collection, this seems likely.  Keep .

(D)  Museum officials believe that forgers have no technique that can convincingly simulate the patchy weathering characteristic of the surfaces of ancient sculptures.  - The opinion of the museum officials doesn't alter the facts/premises stated, i.e., the uniform weathering on the surface is usually an indication of forgery. The correct answer would weaken the link. This option has no impact on the conclusion.  Drop

(E)  An allegedly Roman sculpture with a uniform surface similar to that of the statue being offered to the museum was recently shown to be a forgery.  - This actually strengthens the conclusion.  Drop

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

A museum has been offered an undocumented statue, supposedly

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A museum has been offered an undocumented statue, supposedly

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards