An artist must suffer for his art say these successful

Question

1. An artist must suffer for his art say
these successful entrepreneurs who attempt
to pass themselves off as artists.
They auction off to the highest bidder,
usually a fool in his own right, the most
mediocre of drawings; and then, from
their well-laid tables, they have the unmitigated
gall to imply that they themselves
_____________.
Choose the answer that best completes
the paragraph.
(A) are connoisseurs of art
(B) suffer deprivation for the sake of their
work
(C) are artists
(D) know art better than the art critics do
(E) do not enjoy a good meal

2. Having just completed Introductory
Logic 9, I feel competent to instruct
others in the intricacies of this wonderful
discipline. Logic is concerned with
correct reasoning in the form of syllogisms.
A syllogism consists of three
statements, two of which are premises,
the third of which is the conclusion.
Here is an example:
MAJOR PREMISE: The American buffalo is
disappearing.
MINOR PREMISE: This animal is an American
buffalo.
CONCLUSION: Therefore, this animal is
disappearing.
Once one has been indoctrinated into
the mysteries of this arcane science, there
is no statement one may not assert with
complete confidence.

The main purpose of the author’s argument
is to
(A) provide instruction in logic
(B) supply a definition
(C) cast doubt on the value of formal logic
(D) present an argument for the protection
of the American buffalo
(E) show the precise relationship between
the premises and the conclusion of
his example

jade3 · Answer

Question 1. “They auction off to the highest bidder the most mediocre of drawings”. This statement implies the judgmental power or lack of it of entrepreneurs.

A person who judges fine art is connoisseurs

So IMO the answer is A.

Question 2. I presume the author is supply the definition of syllogism

So the answer is B

ezinis · Answer

keep going everybody, i will post official answers & explanations, which I think will subject to debate, tomorrow.

ezinis · Answer

1. The correct answer is (B) . The author is accusing the artists of being inconsistent,
claiming that they give lip service to the idea that an artist must suffer, but that
they then live in material comfort so they do not themselves suffer. Only (B) completes
the paragraph in a way so that this inconsistency comes out. (A) and (D) can be
dismissed because the author is attacking artists, not connoisseurs or purchasers of
art, nor critics of art. (C) is inadequate, for it does not reveal the inconsistency. The
author apparently allows that these people are, after a fashion, artists, but objects to
their claiming that it is necessary to suffer while they do not themselves suffer. (E) is
the second best answer, but it fails, too. The difficulty with (E) is that the author’s point
is that there is a contradiction between the actions and the words of artists: They claim
to suffer but they do not. But the claimed suffering goes beyond matters of eating and
has to do with deprivation generally.

2. The correct answer is (E) . The sample syllogism uses its terms in an ambiguous
way. In the first premise, the category “American buffalo” is used to refer to the
group as a whole, but in the second premise it is used to denote a particular
member of that group. In the first premise, “disappearing” refers to extinction of a
group, but in the second premise “disappearing” apparently means fading from
view. (E) is fraught with similar ambiguities. The argument there moves from
wealthy people as a group to a particular wealthy person, an illegitimate shifting
of terminology. (A) is a distraction. It mentions subject matter similar to that
of the question stem, but our task is to parallel the form of the argument, not to find an 
argument on a similar topic. (A), incidentally, is an unambiguous and valid
argument. So too is (B), and a moment’s reflection will reveal that it is very similar
to (A). (C) is not similar to (A) and (B), but then again it is not parallel to the
question stem. (C) contains circular reasoning the very thing to be proved had
to be assumed in the first place but while circular reasoning is incorrect reasoning,
it does not parallel the error committed by the question stem: ambiguity.
(D) is clearly a correct argument, so it cannot be parallel to the question stem,
which contains a fallacious argument.

vannbj · Answer

Let's discuss.

I got B for number 1 after reading it a few times it was the only one that made sense. But your explanation for number 2 mentions things that aren't even in the question. Where does "the argument there move from
wealthy people as a group to a particular wealthy person" for A? It looks like it's the OA from another question using the same passage. Am I crazy?

ezinis · Answer

The explanations I posted above are from ARCO. They drive me crazy too. That's why I want to look for another opinion.

govindsowrirajan · Answer

I know that I am 4 1/2 years late in joining this discussion but I must say, 2 very good questions.

divineacclivity · Answer

I can't understand why B is wrong for the second one; can't figure out decide B & E; only a little more inclined towards B (apparently the wrong answer

) Experts, could you please help here? 2. Having just completed Introductory Logic 9, I feel competent to instruct others in the intricacies of this wonderful discipline. Logic is concerned with correct reasoning in the form of syllogisms. A syllogism consists of three statements, two of which are premises, the third of which is the conclusion. Here is an example: MAJOR PREMISE: The American buffalo is disappearing. MINOR PREMISE: This animal is an American buffalo. CONCLUSION: Therefore, this animal is disappearing. Once one has been indoctrinated into the mysteries of this arcane science, there is no statement one may not assert with complete confidence. The main purpose of the author’s argument is to (A) provide instruction in logic (B) supply a definition (C) cast doubt on the value of formal logic (D) present an argument for the protection of the American buffalo (E) show the precise relationship between the premises and the conclusion of his example

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.

An artist must suffer for his art say these successful

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