Last visit was: 22 Jul 2024, 22:26 It is currently 22 Jul 2024, 22:26
Toolkit
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

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.

# Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94517
Own Kudos [?]: 643137 [1]
Given Kudos: 86719
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 94517
Own Kudos [?]: 643137 [0]
Given Kudos: 86719
General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 21 Jan 2018
Status:Improving everyday
Posts: 108
Own Kudos [?]: 69 [1]
Given Kudos: 64
Location: India
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.23
WE:Engineering (Aerospace and Defense)
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2018
Posts: 305
Own Kudos [?]: 682 [1]
Given Kudos: 19
Location: India
Re: Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Let's make the acronyms for such long jargons first.

Eighteenth-century European aesthetics -- EA
theory of aesthetics = aesthetic theory -- AT

Premise: EA was reasonably successful until 1960, when artists rebelled against it.
Conclusion: Since the work of rebellious artists was beyond the then AT, there can be no complete AT.

What's wrong with the conclusion?
It says that : Then-AT failed, so there will be no AT ever.
Such a strong toned conclusion can easily be attacked.

(A) takes for granted that it is more important for a complete aesthetic theory to account for the beauty of traditional art than for it to account for the beauty of self-consciously rebellious artists
The complete-AT should have included the work of rebellious artists (that's why the artists rebelled) .
The argument is not about "importance" of one over another.

(B) presumes, without providing justification, that artists’ rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was not guided by their knowledge of eighteenth century European aesthetic theory
The problem just states that "artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art".
Look at the word "guided". Whether it was guided by EA or not - does not matter.

(C) presumes, without providing justification, that an aesthetic theory developed in one part of the world cannot be applied in another
This geographical difference on application is not mentioned.
(D) presumes, without providing justification, that art from the 1960s is the only art that cannot be adequately addressed by eighteenth- century European aesthetics
I don't know about other arts.
(E) presumes, without providing justification, that eighteenth-century European aesthetics is as encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be
Then-AT failed, so there will be no AT ever (as any AT will fail as then-AT failed).
This is what the conclusion's mistake.

IMO E
Director
Joined: 29 Apr 2019
Status:Learning
Posts: 729
Own Kudos [?]: 589 [1]
Given Kudos: 49
Re: Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Correct option E

Premise:
Before: European aesthetics was inside the bounds of aesthetic theory, including abstract art.
After: 1960s, when artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art.
- the work of these rebellious artists is quite beautiful
- outside the bounds of the aesthetic theory than current,
Conclusion: there can be no complete theory of aesthetics.
Assumption: only European aesthetics theory could successfully encompass all Art ever before 1800c

The reasoning above is most vulnerable to criticism in that it

(A) takes for granted that
- it is more important for a complete aesthetic theory
- to account for the beauty of traditional art than for it
- to account for the beauty of self-consciously rebellious art
Wrong: Irrelevant to conclusion, comparison between “beauty”, not about rebelled artists of 1900c and artists before 1800c

(B) presumes, without providing justification, that
artists’ rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was
not guided by their knowledge of 1800c century European aesthetic theory
Wrong: this actually focus on why rebellious artists, not been guided by 1800c artists, still ended with outside the bound of aesthetic theory, which is not logically apply to conclusion or authors assumption.

(C) presumes, without providing justification, that
- an aesthetic theory developed in one part of the world
- cannot be applied in another
Wrong: Why? 1800c to 1900c to another world, makes this not relevant to reach to find any flaw to conclusion

(D) presumes, without providing justification, that
- art from the 1960s is the only art that
Wrong: This actually some sense makes conclusion strengthen, because it indicates 1960s art was beautiful, and superior than 1800c

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that
- 1800c European aesthetics is as
- encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be
Correct: as encompassing as aesthetic theory! , this raise the flaw and criticism, if it was, why would artists raise rebel, counter the earlier art, and find an alternate outbound aesthetic theory than earlier one and still end up with beautiful one
Re: Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6991 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
236 posts
CR Forum Moderator
824 posts