Historian: Flavius, an ancient Roman governor who believed deeply in

Question

Historian: Flavius, an ancient Roman governor who believed deeply in the virtues of manual labor and moral temperance, actively sought to discourage the arts by removing state financial support for them. Also, Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects, as we can conclude from the large number of satirical plays that were written about him during his administration.

The historian’s argumentation is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

(A) fails to consider the percentage of plays written during Flavius’s administration that were not explicitly about Flavius

(B) treats the satirical plays as a reliable indicator of Flavius’s popularity despite potential bias on the part of the playwrights

(C) presumes, without providing evidence, that Flavius was unfavorably disposed toward the arts

(D) takes for granted that Flavius’s attempt to discourage the arts was successful

(E) fails to consider whether manual labor and moral temperance were widely regarded as virtues in ancient Rome

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

Nah, this is bullshit because the conclusion is much broader than what’s warranted by the facts. Flavius cut funding for the arts, so it’s not a shocker that he was criticized in many plays, which are, after all, part of the arts. It would be foolish to assume, on these facts, that Flavius was “widely unpopular among his subjects,” unless of course his subjects were all artists, which is not in evidence here.

We’re asked to find a flaw in the logic. One way of stating it would be “makes a broader conclusion than is warranted by the facts.”

A) Not what I’m looking for.

B) Yes, exactly. Playwrights might have hated Flavius for cutting their paychecks, so the opinion of playwrights isn’t a “reliable indicator” of his popularity among his subjects more broadly. Great answer.

C) No, the argument doesn’t do this. The argument provides evidence that Flavius “believed deeply in manual labor and temperance,” and more evidence that Flavius “removed financial support” for the arts. Those two things are pretty solid evidence that Flavius hated the arts.

D) The argument doesn’t make any conclusions whatsoever about the impact Flavius had on the arts. Maybe he succeeded, maybe he didn’t—we just don’t know.

E) This is simply irrelevant to the question of whether the plays are good evidence of Flavius’ popularity.

Our answer is B, because it shows why the argument is bullshit.

asishron29181 · Answer

Premise: Large number of satirical plays were written about Flavius during his administration.
Conclusion: Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects.

We need to find a possible flaw in the reasoning.
The author could have assumed that the satirical plays gives an accurate picture of Flavius. The author trusts the credibility of the satirical plays.

Option B goes in line with the assumption.

(B) treats the satirical plays as a reliable indicator of Flavius’s popularity despite potential bias on the part of the playwrights

IMO B

100mitra · Answer

Correct Option B .

Before that small information:
 Satirical : the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

Assumption of passage by Historian :
Flavius, an ancient Roman governor, discouraged arts by stop funding, his character was highlighted Satirical in play.
 Conclusion : Flavius is not popular.

Now the question raises is, why would a play would be written by playwrights, when no support is given to them? 
This raise question on play, are they really reliable?
 This makes our option B, Correct

Wrong Option:
Option A - gives detail about % of play written or performed, were not in a clear and detailed manner.

Option C - asking evidence, Flavius inclination towards arts was or not.

Option D - asks details about Flavius, successful to discourage arts

Option E - irrelevant

Posted from my mobile device

Sumi1010 · Answer

The argument says -

Since the large number of satirical plays that were written about him during his administration, Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects.

We have to see  the flaw  in the above reasoning. 
  Note:  We don't have to weaken it, so the right choice must NOT add any further information. In the weakening questions, we see the phrase  "which of the following, if true, ..."

The best approach to look through the flaws is to raise many questions.
- Satirical plays that were written about him... -  Written good or bad? 
- Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects -  Did the writers of plays resonate the subjects view?

(A) fails to  consider the percentage of plays  written during Flavius’s administration that were not explicitly about Flavius
 Is this consideration important? Say 20% of plays were not explicitly about Flavius. 
They could be "implicit" about Flavius or could be not related to Flavius.  
 The choices that seek results of percentage and proportions are generally the part of "Evaluate the argument" problems. 
(B) treats the satirical plays as a reliable indicator of Flavius’s popularity despite potential bias on the part of the playwrights
 Right. We don't know :  Did the writers of plays resonate the subjects view?  
(C) presumes, without providing evidence, that Flavius was unfavorably disposed toward the arts
 There is a supporting evidence - "by removing state financial support for them" 
(D) takes for granted that Flavius’s attempt to discourage the arts was successful
 The success of the attempt is not scoped in the argument, the "intention" is. 
(E) fails to consider whether manual labor and moral temperance were widely regarded as virtues in ancient Rome
 The argument is about "  virtues of  manual labor and moral temperance" , which does not imply that "manual labor and moral temperance  were virtues "

Clearly,  B

TAC470 · Answer

Conclusion : Flavius was widely unpopular among his subjects.
Falsification of this conclusion would be : Flavius was not widely unpopular among his subjects.
Pre-think: what if the those plays were biased or those plays are not the true representation of his popularity .

Option B matches with our pre-think scenario hence is the answer.

B for me .

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.

Historian: Flavius, an ancient Roman governor who believed deeply in

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

Historian: Flavius, an ancient Roman governor who believed deeply in

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