It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 13:22

Close

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
Your Progress

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Owners of any work of art

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Mar 2014
Posts: 36

Kudos [?]: 28 [1], given: 11

Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT 1: 550 Q47 V20
GPA: 3.2
GMAT ToolKit User
Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jan 2017, 22:00
1
This post received
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

23% (01:36) correct 78% (01:59) wrong based on 240 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of
ownership, ethically have the right to destroy
that artwork if they find it morally or
aesthetically
distasteful, or if caring for it becomes
inconvenient.
Jorge: Ownership of unique artworks, unlike
ownership of other kinds of objects, carries the
moral right to possess but not to destroy. A
unique work of art with aesthetic or historical
value belongs to posterity and so must be
preserved, whatever the personal wishes of its
legal owner.

On the basis of their statements, Shanna and Jorge
are committed to disagreeing about the truth of
which one of the following statements?
(A) Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or
her father in an unflattering light would for
that reason alone be ethically justified in
destroying it.
(B) People who own aesthetically valuable works
of art have no moral obligation to make them
available for public viewing.
(C) Valuable paintings by well-known artists are
seldom intentionally damaged or destroyed
by their owners.
(D) If a piece of sculpture is not unique, its owner
has no ethical obligation to preserve it if
doing so proves burdensome.
(E) It is legally permissible for a unique and
historically valuable mural to be destroyed
by its owner if he or she tires of it.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by nahid007 on 07 Feb 2017, 06:39, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 28 [1], given: 11

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Mar 2014
Posts: 36

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 11

Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
GMAT 1: 550 Q47 V20
GPA: 3.2
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Feb 2017, 06:40
rishit1080 wrote:
lol where's the question?



I was playing HIDE and SEEK... Lol :lol: :wink:

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 11

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Posts: 85

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 99

Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q50 V30
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Feb 2017, 08:12
Is E wrong because we are talking about legal obligation ?

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 99

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3304 [1], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Feb 2017, 13:45
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
ankujgupta wrote:
Is E wrong because we are talking about legal obligation ?


Your understanding is correct. If one of the persons said that it is legal to destroy artwork and the other said it is illegal, then option E would be correct.

Kudos [?]: 3304 [1], given: 22

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Posts: 54

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 7

Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Feb 2017, 20:01
Was thinking about A, but sided with B. The reason i steered clear of A was because it did not mention anything about " aesthetic or historical
value", which the second argument hinges on. Instead, I felt that B was closer to the original argument as instead of destroying a piece of work, an individual could just file it away forever, never to be seen again.

Could someone give me their two cents on this?

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 7

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 269

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 906

Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: 314 Q167 V147
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Feb 2017, 08:49
Hi experts,
But how can the portrait in option A has any historical value?
Jorge presents his view on unique artworks,not any form of art just like a simple portrait of anyone's father.

Thanks

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 906

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 479

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 18

Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Feb 2017, 15:40
Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of ownership, ethically have the right to destroy that artwork if they find it morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient.
Jorge: Ownership of unique artworks, unlike ownership of other kinds of objects, carries the moral right to possess but not to destroy. A unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value belongs to posterity and so must be preserved, whatever the personal wishes of its legal owner.

On the basis of their statements, Shanna and Jorge are committed to disagreeing about the truth of which one of the following statements?

(A) Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or
her father in an unflattering light would for
that reason alone be ethically justified in
destroying it.
(B) People who own aesthetically valuable works
of art have no moral obligation to make them
available for public viewing.
(C) Valuable paintings by well-known artists are
seldom intentionally damaged or destroyed
by their owners.
(D) If a piece of sculpture is not unique, its owner
has no ethical obligation to preserve it if
doing so proves burdensome.
(E) It is legally permissible for a unique and
historically valuable mural to be destroyed
by its owner if he or she tires of it.

Option A is correct since even if the portrait is unique and valueable the person who owns it has the right to destroy it if one finds it distastful.
Option B speaks about public viewing which is out of scope for the argument .
Option C is speaking that valuable paintings are seldom destroyed by their owners,and that mens that there is n need for any discussion which is wrong so the argument clearly not pointing to this choice.
Option D point of uniqueness is mentioned by the second speaker but not by the first speaker so its not completely the point of argument.
Option E is highlighting the legal aspect of the obligation of the owner of a piece of artwork which is out of scope .

Kudos [?]: 77 [0], given: 18

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2017, 05:48
sleepynut wrote:
Hi experts,
But how can the portrait in option A has any historical value?
Jorge presents his view on unique artworks,not any form of art just like a simple portrait of anyone's father.

Thanks


The portrait may have aesthetic value (Jorge argues about portraits with aesthetic OR historical value).

One may argue that since a portrait owned by him / her depicts his / her own father, he / she has the right to destroy it. Shanna would agree with this person, indicating that owning the artwork is enough to have the right to destroy it, but Jorge would disagree, indicating that the portrait may be aesthetically valuable, and thus the owner does not have right to destroy it.

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2017, 05:55
pafrompa wrote:
Was thinking about A, but sided with B. The reason i steered clear of A was because it did not mention anything about " aesthetic or historical
value", which the second argument hinges on. Instead, I felt that B was closer to the original argument as instead of destroying a piece of work, an individual could just file it away forever, never to be seen again.

Could someone give me their two cents on this?


B is out of scope because the difference in Shanna's view and Jorge's view is not about whether the artwork should be made available for public vieweing, but about the right to destroy an artwork. My above post explains why option A is correct.

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 08 Feb 2017
Posts: 9

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 22

Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2017, 06:21
sayantanc2k wrote:
sleepynut wrote:
Hi experts,
But how can the portrait in option A has any historical value?
Jorge presents his view on unique artworks,not any form of art just like a simple portrait of anyone's father.

Thanks


The portrait may have aesthetic value (Jorge argues about portraits with aesthetic OR historical value).

One may argue that since a portrait owned by him / her depicts his / her own father, he / she has the right to destroy it. Shanna would agree with this person, indicating that owning the artwork is enough to have the right to destroy it, but Jorge would disagree, indicating that the portrait may be aesthetically valuable, and thus the owner does not have right to destroy it.


Hey, I completely agree with your explanation, but the question stem says both Shanna and Jorge should disagree whereas Shanna agrees with choice A and Jorge doesn't.

Please explain where I'm going wrong?

Posted from my mobile device

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 22

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jun 2013
Posts: 91

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 41

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, International Business
Schools: ISB '19, IIMA , IIMB
GMAT 1: 590 Q42 V29
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Retail Banking)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2017, 09:34
sayantanc2k wrote:
pafrompa wrote:
Was thinking about A, but sided with B. The reason i steered clear of A was because it did not mention anything about " aesthetic or historical
value", which the second argument hinges on. Instead, I felt that B was closer to the original argument as instead of destroying a piece of work, an individual could just file it away forever, never to be seen again.

Could someone give me their two cents on this?


B is out of scope because the difference in Shanna's view and Jorge's view is not about whether the artwork should be made available for public vieweing, but about the right to destroy an artwork. My above post explains why option A is correct.


We have to select the option for which both Shanna and Jorge disagree (Please correct if I am wrong).
Then how come A is correct ?
It will be really helpful if you can explain all the options :)
_________________

Remember, if it is a GMAT question, it can be simplified elegantly.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 41

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2017, 10:34
hotshot02 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
pafrompa wrote:
Was thinking about A, but sided with B. The reason i steered clear of A was because it did not mention anything about " aesthetic or historical
value", which the second argument hinges on. Instead, I felt that B was closer to the original argument as instead of destroying a piece of work, an individual could just file it away forever, never to be seen again.

Could someone give me their two cents on this?


B is out of scope because the difference in Shanna's view and Jorge's view is not about whether the artwork should be made available for public vieweing, but about the right to destroy an artwork. My above post explains why option A is correct.


We have to select the option for which both Shanna and Jorge disagree (Please correct if I am wrong).
Then how come A is correct ?

It will be really helpful if you can explain all the options :)


If we say that we disagree about some point, the statement implies that we are on the opposite sides about that point.

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 08 Feb 2017
Posts: 9

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 22

Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2017, 11:20
Darkhorse12 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
sleepynut wrote:
Hi experts,
But how can the portrait in option A has any historical value?
Jorge presents his view on unique artworks,not any form of art just like a simple portrait of anyone's father.

Thanks


The portrait may have aesthetic value (Jorge argues about portraits with aesthetic OR historical value).

One may argue that since a portrait owned by him / her depicts his / her own father, he / she has the right to destroy it. Shanna would agree with this person, indicating that owning the artwork is enough to have the right to destroy it, but Jorge would disagree, indicating that the portrait may be aesthetically valuable, and thus the owner does not have right to destroy it.


Hey, I completely agree with your explanation, but the question stem says both Shanna and Jorge should disagree whereas Shanna agrees with choice A and Jorge doesn't.

Please explain where I'm going wrong?


Posted from my mobile device



sayantanc2k could you please explain?

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 22

Expert Post
Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2017, 05:46
Darkhorse12 wrote:
Darkhorse12 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:

The portrait may have aesthetic value (Jorge argues about portraits with aesthetic OR historical value).

One may argue that since a portrait owned by him / her depicts his / her own father, he / she has the right to destroy it. Shanna would agree with this person, indicating that owning the artwork is enough to have the right to destroy it, but Jorge would disagree, indicating that the portrait may be aesthetically valuable, and thus the owner does not have right to destroy it.


Hey, I completely agree with your explanation, but the question stem says both Shanna and Jorge should disagree whereas Shanna agrees with choice A and Jorge doesn't.

Please explain where I'm going wrong?


Posted from my mobile device



sayantanc2k could you please explain?


I have already replied to the same query by another user:
owners-of-any-work-of-art-232783.html#p1805221

Kudos [?]: 3304 [0], given: 22

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Posts: 282

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 622

Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2017, 10:40
My reasoning on this - the basic understanding is the question STEM. It is saying "Shanna and Jorge
are committed to disagreeing about the truth of which one of the following statements?" - basically both MUST agree about disagreeing. It seemed really convoluted and after picking the wrong answer E - which is basically what Shanna is saying/ and Jorge disagreeing, the following reasoning emerges from the fog :?
(A) Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or
her father in an unflattering light would for
that reason alone be ethically justified in
destroying it.Yes - both would agree to this - either of them have only spoken of legal implications or moral ones but not this one - most likely out of all 5 options that this is possible
(B) People who own aesthetically valuable works
of art have no moral obligation to make them
available for public viewing.Extraneous
(C) Valuable paintings by well-known artists are
seldom intentionally damaged or destroyed
by their owners. Irrelevant
(D) If a piece of sculpture is not unique, its owner
has no ethical obligation to preserve it if
doing so proves burdensome. What Shanna is ALSO saying
(E) It is legally permissible for a unique and
historically valuable mural to be destroyed
by its owner if he or she tires of it. - what Shanna is saying - with which Jorge disagrees

Experts, please do post more questions like these! It takes some practice to figure these kinds out :)

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 622

Director
Director
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 899

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 865

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Owners of any work of art [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2017, 12:07
these questions are not new in gmat.

In gmat, question types can be responding (how B respond to A), parallel / application, and the flow of logic in the passage (for example, A talks this and gives this example, then continue to give additional reason. B disagrees for reasons.)

This question is just simply a responding question. Complex questions are very rare in gmat; perhaps, only test takers with 800 points will encounter.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 865

Re: Owners of any work of art   [#permalink] 22 Sep 2017, 12:07
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Owners of any work of art

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.