Bunuel wrote:
It is due to a misunderstanding that most modern sculpture is monochromatic. When ancient sculptures were exhumed years ago, they were discovered to be uncolored. No one at the time had reason to believe, as we now do, that the sculptures had originally been colorfully painted, but that centuries of exposure to moisture washed away the paint.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The natural beauty of the materials out of which modern sculptures are made plays a part in their effect.
(B) Modern sculpture has been influenced by beliefs about ancient sculpture.
(C) Ancient sculptures were more susceptible to moisture damage than are modern sculptures.
(D) Some ancient paintings known to early archaeologists depicted sculptures.
(E) As modern sculptors come to believe that ancient sculpture was painted, they will begin to create polychromatic works.
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
The first sentence indicates that this is a cause-and-effect argument. Why is most modern sculpture monochromatic? Well, because of “a misunderstanding.” This is the conclusion, I’m fairly certain, and I’m expecting the rest of the argument to explain what the “misunderstanding” was. Let’s see.
Yep! Today our fancypants artists think they are honoring classical traditions by making their sculptures in just one color, because that’s what they see when they look at Michelangelo’s
David. But what they’re missing is that
David was once painted in fabulous, vivid color and the paint washed off over the centuries. (I’ll let you decide which of David’s parts were painted in what color. Have fun.)
The question asks us to identify a necessary assumption of the argument. I think it’s got to be something like, “Today’s artists don’t know that old sculptures were once painted.” That’s my prediction, because if that’s
not true, then the argument simply makes no sense. Remember: A necessary assumption is one that must be true, or else the argument will fail.
A) Not what we’re looking for. This can definitely be untrue without ruining the argument.
B) This could be it. If this isn’t true, then we get, “Modern sculpture has
not been influenced by beliefs about ancient sculpture,” which would make the whole argument fall apart. (How would the “misunderstanding” affect today’s sculpture in that case?) This isn’t exactly what we predicted, but like our prediction it
must be true in order for the argument to make any sense. This could be it.
C) Nah, this could be false without the argument failing. Not what we’re looking for at all, and B is already pretty good, so this one is definitely out.
D) This one is just a mess. “Paintings” are completely irrelevant to the argument. No way.
E) What may or may not happen in the future is totally irrelevant to the argument’s proposed conclusion about why today’s sculpture is the way it is.
Our answer has to be B, because it’s the only one that must be true in order for the argument to make sense. (If it’s untrue, the argument fails.)