Certain similarities between prehistoric art and the art of

D for me......I'm assuming art involves painting here

I would go for B...

Difficulty level of the art of childrens (present) is assumed to be the same of as that of prehistoric art(past).

Vivek.

Well I have some supporters here. I will go with B on this one.

D talks about just paiting. We dont know if the prehistoric humans knew painting. They might know something other than paiting and still do something that children today do.
Well recently I have been getting quite a few CRs wrong

Correct me if I'm way off base here. I will make a couple assumtions about this question. First, I'm assuming this is an LSAT question. Second, I'm assuming it would be considered a "hard" question. Given that, I think there are trick answers designed to lure in the unsuspecting.

B talks about easy. The assumption is that what a child does is easy and therefore is like what the caveman did. I think this is too broad an assumption or outside the scope of the argument.

D, as stated before, talks about painting only and is therefore too narrow in scope.

Both these seem like they could be correct, but I think A is the assumption that bridges the gap in reasoning.

The reasoning is assuming that prehistoric art is not sophisticated and is therefore like a childs art. But, if the caveman thought the art was very sophisticated and worked very hard to produce the simplistic art, it would not be like a childs art at all.

So, what is sophisticated today is assumed to be what was sophisticated back in caveman days.....

I choose A.

Am I whacked???

Yeah,

Is it of the type...
If p then q....
IF NOT Q, then NOT P....

So NOT EASY (sophisticated), SO is for today...

Wow, IMO this question is deadly! Ok, here's my thought, to find assumption we need to take into consideraion two parts. First, because of similarities between prehistoric art and the art of children we'll say that they (pre-hist) had mentality of children or they were as unskilled as children. I don't believe any of the choices offer an assumption supporting both statements.

A) Possibly-unless find one better

B) What was easy, Too general for me (although I like it)

C) oh oh, close here. Let's say the significance is not important. That for example pre-historic men only did it for specific purposes, or better yet were too busy hunting and so on, and only children were doodling. Hmm, keep for now

D) As Anandnk said, too limited, what about scultures, or building whatever, we can't assume that art is limited to painting.

E) HUH? Don't see that assumption anywhere, a little to farfetched.


Ok, so A vs C, In A sophisticated makes me cringe, dont think its about sophistication. So, C is it for me. Definitely > 2min

OA is C!!! lvb9th, you take home the first prize
This is indeed another LSAT problem AND a very hard one. Once again, bravo everyone for your input

I cannot some to terms with C at all. Why is there the word significance

C would be correct in my opinion if it were worded as "perception of art as a skilled mature from of expression is consistent over time"
Basically saying that the definition of art has not changed over time.

Anandnk,

I see your point and agree that it could be phrased better, but its always just the best of the worst! B is incorrect and much weaker than C b/c there is no assumption about what was easy or not. Nowhere do you see a reference to art being easy now or back then. On top of which, the sentence makes too much of a generalization. In fact, we are comparing children's art, basically saying that its not really art, art is much more difficult-MENTALITY of children and unskilled. Most importantly, it is highly improbable that the author will agree with the begining of B. That's why B doesnt fit. I no longer look for the absolute answer!

Well the argument uses the word "unskilled" I pretty much assumed that whatever unskilled is easy.

I would have gone with A here as well. I liked the sophistication better than significance