vad3tha wrote:
Museum A will henceforth display only undamaged objects of proven authenticity. Doubts have been raised about the origins of a supposedly Mycenaean vase currently on display in the museum's antiquities wing. The only way to establish this vase's authenticity would be to pulverize it, then subject the dust to spectroscopic analysis.
The claims above, if true, most strongly support which of the following conclusions?
(A) Authentic Mycenaean vases are valuable and rare.
(B) Museum A has been beset with questions about the provenance of many of the items
in its antiquities wing.
(C) The vase in question will no longer be displayed in Museum A.
(D) Spectroscopic analysis has revolutionized the forensic investigation of art forgery.
(E) Knowingly or not, many of the world's museums display some forgeries.
this is "draw a conclusion" type of question.
based on the info in the argument, we need to find an answer choice that would best be supported by the premises given.
P1 -> only undamaged objects are displayed
P2 -> to prove it's authenticity, the vase needs to be "damaged".
C - regardless of the results, the vase will be damaged and even if it's not a forgery, it will no longer be displayed in the museum.
A. irrelevant.
B. so what?
C. aha. if it's a forgery - will be removed from the exposition. if not, it will be damaged, and thus not be displayed.
D. irrelevant.
E. irrelevant.