It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 17:28

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

11 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 468

Kudos [?]: 136 [11], given: 0

Location: united states
A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2006, 11:35
11
This post received
KUDOS
59
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?


A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.
_________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..


Last edited by bb on 24 Mar 2016, 09:54, edited 4 times in total.
Added official answer

Kudos [?]: 136 [11], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 14 May 2015
Posts: 12

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 145

CAT Tests
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jun 2016, 21:37
CONCLUSION : Michelangelo must have been completed the painting after 1507 but before 1509
OPTION B : Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.
NEGATE B : Michelangelo worked on the painting over the course of several years.Look at the conclusion ,in which author clearly states that painting was strictly completed between 1507 and 1509.However ,statement B on negation says that Michelangelo worked on the painting over the course of several years (many years) .
Let's look at the premises more closely to get a clear picture:
1) It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year.
But it can be possible that coin was minted after 1509 .
2nd premise:
2) It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.
But here as well Michelangelo might have been using pigments before 1507.
the negated statement in light of above interpretation of premises directly refutes author's assertion that painting was started and finished between 1507 and 1509 respectively.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 145

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 31 Aug 2014
Posts: 5

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

Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2016, 18:44
I got B, which makes sense. I am just curious about another assumption I had in mind, which isnt one of the answer choice, but given the initial argument, I want to understand if the assumption I formulated is correct.

Original statement: ...o must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509.
Assumption: That the coin that was minted in 1507 could not have been used during 1507 to complete the painting.
The situation I am proposing is: The coin of 1507 would have been available in 1507. Can the painting not be completed on December 31st, 1507 with that coin? In this case, the painting was not complete "after" 1507 but during.

What do you guys think? Thanks in advance :)

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

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Jan 2016
Posts: 27

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 14

Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GPA: 3.2
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2016, 06:38
A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509. --> Irrelevent - the question is concerned whether MA used or not. Not that the pigment existed or not

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years. --> thus it can be within the relevant period

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507. --> It is possible that MA designed the coin which was later accepted for printing in 1507

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age. --> wooden panel can be older... it is the painting the question is concened with.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509. --> Irrelevent. Style is not in question

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 14

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Jul 2015
Posts: 66

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 21

GMAT 1: 720 Q51 V35
GPA: 3.69
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2016, 10:10
Hi,

I understand the thought process here. But I have a small doubt. How can we say that negation in choice B has destroyed the conclusion - as even if it started in 07' and ended in 09', these are still 3 years( or several years according to choice).

Thanks

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 21

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 27 May 2016
Posts: 11

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 208

CAT Tests
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2016, 04:52
shoonya wrote:
A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?


A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.



Can any kind-hearted soul explain to me why option C is wrong. According to me if the coin is not known to the people who were during the period after 1507 then it weakens the statement, I tried to negate the statement and I found it was weakening the statement. But the best contenders were Option B and Option C, of the two I shall choose option C

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 208

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3155

Kudos [?]: 3290 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Oct 2016, 10:42
Karthic26 wrote:
Can any kind-hearted soul explain to me why option C is wrong. According to me if the coin is not known to the people who were during the period after 1507 then it weakens the statement, I tried to negate the statement and I found it was weakening the statement. But the best contenders were Option B and Option C, of the two I shall choose option C



Negating option C does not break down the argument. Suppose the general public did NOT know about the coin - this does not imply that the painting was done BEFORE 1507. At most, it may imply that the painting was done AFTER 1507, if one considers that Michael Angelo is one among the general public. So negating C at most supports the argument, not opposes - hence cannot be an assumption.

Kudos [?]: 3290 [0], given: 22

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Status: DONE!
Joined: 05 Sep 2016
Posts: 408

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 283

Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Nov 2016, 16:00
A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509. --> doesn't matter because prompt stated he abandoned using older pigment once cheaper version was introduced. Thus, eliminate.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years. --> Correct, by POE. Also, can be supported if you're still not convinced by the negation test (i.e. he completed work in course of several years).

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507. --> eliminate; whether or not coin is known to the general public doesn't change that it was minted in a specific year.

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age. -->great, the wood can be tested. This doesn't solve the issue of when the painting was completed. The wood could be a lot older than the painting itself and therefore provide a misleading conclusion. Thus, eliminate.

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509. --> his painting style has no effect on when the painting was completed. Thus, eliminate.

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 283

Director
Director
avatar
G
Joined: 02 Sep 2016
Posts: 776

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 267

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Dec 2016, 04:01
A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509.
Premise: It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year.
Premise: It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.
Conclusion: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509.

The painting must have been COMPLETED after 1507 but before 1509. Only ‘completed’ and not started. It might be possible that Michelangelo was working on this painting from before 1507 and after 1509 bringing in changes with time as mentioned in the two premises.

We have to look for a choice that eliminates any weakener.

Let’s look at the choices:

A) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
Even if stocks existed after 1509, Michelangelo did not use it as mentioned in the passage.

B) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years. This choice matches our pre-thinking. Thus is correct.

C) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507. IRRELEVANT

D) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age. IRRELEVANT because the main points that supports the conclusion are coin and pigment

E) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509. OUT OF SCOPE
_________________

Help me make my explanation better by providing a logical feedback.

If you liked the post, HIT KUDOS !!

Don't quit.............Do it.

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 267

Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 694

Kudos [?]: 179 [0], given: 855

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2017, 22:11
The answer is B, but it's difficult to see without trying to predict what the answer should do before going to the answer choices. For many assumption questions, the key is to think critically - think about what would weaken the conclusion. Attacking an argument is a good way to expose the underlying assumptions that the author makes, but does not state.

There are actually two sets of premises and conclusions in this argument:
Premise: the painting contains a coin that was not available before 1507.
Conclusion: the painting was not painted before 1507.

AND

Premise: Painting contained a pigment that Michelangelo abandoned in 1509.
Conclusion: The painting was finished by 1509

the second one is easier to attack: the fact that the painting contained a pigment (not painted entirely in the pigment - just contained the pigment) does not by itself say that Michelangelo could not continue working on painting beyond 1509 using different kinds of pigments.

The first is attacked in the same manner: the fact that part of the painting (in this case, a coin) has a "not before 1507" date does not meant that the painting as a whole was painted after 1507: It is possible that other parts of the painting were painted before 1507, with the coin added AFTER 1507 at a later stage.

These are weakening hypotheses, not found in the text, but they expose the assumption - the author is assuming that "expiry dates" on parts of the painting represent the entire painting as a whole - that if he started on the coin in 1507, he started the entire painting at 1507, and if he finished with the pigment in 1509, he must have finished the entire painting before that time.

B works against that assumption: If Michelangelo paused in his work on the painting, that would explain why the painting could be painted outside of the range, with only the relevant parts painted within the range. Therefore, in reaching his conclusion that the parts represent the whole, the author must assume that the painting was painted more or less within a short period of time - a year or two. B is a necessary assumption because it eliminates a possible counter explanation that would weaken the conclusion.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Kudos [?]: 179 [0], given: 855

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Dec 2016
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 3

Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Sep 2017, 13:30
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
2flY wrote:
gmattokyo wrote:
I'll go with A
No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
- Michelangelo abandoned the pigment used to make the paint (not the paint) because cheaper version was available. There is no mention that he stopped using the existing stock. If he has spent a lot making a stock of paint, he'll use that




These were my thoughts. However, this seems to be wrong...


Yes, the reason this option is option (A) is that it is tempting to jump to it right away. But it is incorrect.

The problem here is that the option says 'No stocks existed after 1509'.
We don't need to assume that. Recall that the argument says that Michelangelo stopped using the pigment, not that the pigment was not manufactured after 1509. It is immaterial whether stock of the pigment existed after 1509. We know that Michelangelo abandoned the use of the pigment after 1509.

Look at the argument:
- The painting must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509.
- Not earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year.
- Not after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in 1509.

The argument clearly tells us that Michelangelo abandoned the use of the pigment in 1509. Whether he had stocks of it or not, he abandoned its use in 1509. The argument seems pretty good fit except for one thing - it says that the painting must have been COMPLETED within 1507 to 1509. That's the folly of the argument. Based on the premises, we can say for sure that he painted it during this time frame. We cannot say whether he completed it during this time.
He could have painted it over many years which would include the time frame of 1507 - 1509. When we say that he completed it before 1509, we are assuming that he did the painting in a matter of a few weeks or months, not over many years.

Hence your answer is (B)


Hi Karishma,

Darshna here!

I have a doubt related to option B: I eliminated it on the grounds of that this fact is already mentioned in the argument. It clearly mentions that the painting was made after 1507 and before 1509 that implies it was not made over many years.

Please guide.

Thanks,
Darshna

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 3

Re: A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo   [#permalink] 18 Sep 2017, 13:30

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   [ 130 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.