V12-03

I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation.

Hey, I am just not able to link hiw people will be able to identify duplicate. Because if they will be able to do that then it wouldn't have been an incident

Posted from my mobile device

queries....
The people visiting these museums can find whether a museum displays fake paintings or not.
if people can find whether the painting is fake ,so why is the author recommending people to stop going to museums??
he should have encouraged them?
this is little odd and a poor quality question

Could you clarify what your query is. From your post it is not clear where your doubt is. The structure here is quite straightforward.

Conclusion: If public stops visiting museums that display fake paintings, then the practice of displaying fake painitng would stop.

Assumption: Public can identify fake paintings. (Negation test: If they could not identify, they would not stop visiting these museums and the practice of displaying fake paintings would not stop.)

Where exactly is your doubt?

Karanagrawal P.S. Author is not recommending, encouraging or forbidding people to go or not to those museums. He is concluding something based on an assumption.

The answer is not clear. Where does it say on the argument that the visitors would stop visiting the museum if the visitors know that there are fake displays... Isn't that an assumption already? For instance, you may still want to go to the museum to see a fake /replica painting.

An assumption is an unsaid link between a premise and conclusion. There may be more than one assumption to join this link. Any of them could be right option for an assumption type question. In this case:

The people visiting these museums can find whether a museum displays fake paintings or not AND the visitors would stop visiting the museum if the visitors know that there are fake displays both must be true to complete the argument; therefore both could be correct answers. Existence of multiple assumptions does not make any of them invalid.

i think the answer should be read as 'public can not identify fake painting' because if they could identify then the fake painting could be identify earlier

The conclusion of the officer is: IF the public did not visit such museums, the practice of showing fake displays would stop.

When the public visit the museums and can identify the fake displays, then they would stop visiting. If they cannot recognize at all, then they would continue to visit. We are here discussing about the assumption of the officer, not that of the writer of the passage - think what the officer had assumed when he made the conclusion.

Completely agree with the OE , there is no reason to doubt the quality of question.

A bit of pre thinking process can help one arrive the correct answer within seconds.. The only close option is (B), which sayantanc2k has clarified in this post Here

Thus in option (B) , it is highly possible that administration has all the necessary mechanism to control such unethical practices , however it might be such that only through public support can such unethical practices be completely contained... Now for that to be effective people must be aware of the difference between Fake and Original Paintings ( Which is option C )..

Further the assumption negation technique has been wonderfully explained in this post Negation

Hence there is no issue with the question in my opinion... Without knowledge of the diff between original and fake painting the conclusion cannot be arrived..



People = Plural noun meaning many individuals,
The public = singular noun of people ( the specific group of Museum's visitors )

Hence IMHO no issues with that as well...

Hi Experts,

I am not able to get this question completely. I am not getting how people identifying between fake and real paintings is affecting the conclusion?

Could someone elaborate on option E. Doesn't it strengthen the argument? Is the option wrong if it reframes the conclusion? because anyways assumption has to strengthen the argument.

To find the missing link in this or any assumption based question is it ok If I think it 'how' the conclusion will be reached by the given premise. Pls correct me or shed some light on finding the missing link.

I don't mean to hate, but a lot of these CR questions have very bad flaws in them. I am just going to use official LSAT questions for practice because when breaking down the premises and conclusion, many of the answer choices have flaws.

For example.

"A subsequent investigation uncovered that many museums resort to displaying fake paintings in order to generate revenue."

This is not saying that ALL museums resort to displaying fake paintings in order to generate revenue. Thus, at least one museum is doing it for other reasons. Thus, the conclusion is technically assuming that ALL of the museums do it to generate revenue, so answer choice A choice be a viable option.

Answer choice C is slightly the more obvious answer and why I picked it, but it also has flaws. The conclusion is about if customers stop going to these museums, then they will stop putting up fake painting. It technically is not necessary for the customers to know which museums are putting up fake paintings. They could just assume not go to any museum or even just get lucky and avoid museums that are putting up the fake paintings. It is not 100% necessary for the customers to know which museums to avoid. By the letter of the law, answer choice C is technically not a necessary assumption.

You would never see a question with this many flaws on the LSAT or GMAT.

­

Thank you for the feedback!  
I agree. I am going to remove this question from the Test bank. We will replace it with a better one within the next few weeks. 
As a thank you and a part of our bug bounty program - I have extended your test subscription by 2 weeks.