Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
08 Mar 2013, 12:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
83% (01:31) correct
17%
(01:53)
wrong
based on 3019
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Reviewer: The book Art's Decline argues that European painters today lack skills that were common among European painters of preceding centuries. In this the book must be right, since its analysis of 100 paintings, 50 old and 50 contemporary, demonstrates convincingly that none of the contemporary paintings are executed as skillfully as the older paintings.
Which of the following points to the most serious logical flaw in the reviewer's argument?
(A) The paintings chosen by the book's author for analysis could be those that most support the book's thesis.
(B) There could be criteria other than the technical skill of the artist by which to evaluate a painting.
(C) The title of the book could cause readers to accept the book's thesis even before they read the analysis of the paintings that supports it.
(D) The particular methods currently used by European painters could require less artistic skill than do methods used by painters in other parts of the world.
(E) A reader who was not familiar with the language of art criticism might not be convinced by the book's analysis of the 100 paintings.
Which of the following points to the most serious logical flaw in the reviewer's argument?
(A) The paintings chosen by the book's author for analysis could be those that most support the book's thesis.
(B) There could be criteria other than the technical skill of the artist by which to evaluate a painting.
(C) The title of the book could cause readers to accept the book's thesis even before they read the analysis of the paintings that supports it.
(D) The particular methods currently used by European painters could require less artistic skill than do methods used by painters in other parts of the world.
(E) A reader who was not familiar with the language of art criticism might not be convinced by the book's analysis of the 100 paintings.
I had it between A and D
In retrospect I should have chosen A. It is just cleaner and I think the more familiar I am with a logical flaw the more it fits the bill
Premise 1. European painters lack skills that were common in the preceding century
Premise 2. In the book out of 100 paintings, 50 old, 50 new, none of the newer paintings are executed as skillfully as the older paintings.
Between 1 and 2 the flawed logic or assumption is that the book accurately
Here's where I get a little hung up.
In logical flaw questions, like strengthen and weaken we assume the answer prompts to be true, correct? I ask because I can see a wide array of answers to such logical flaw problems.
A also makes a lot more sense than B because although we can assume D to be true, the prompt tells us nothing about non-European artists. Then again the prompt doesn't tell us the book talks only about European artists, why could D not legitimately point out that these artists could possibly be non-European and hence the error ie because Euro artists are less skilled than world artists ->why we can't conclude that Euro artists between contemporary and old are not more or less skilled from the book;
In retrospect I should have chosen A. It is just cleaner and I think the more familiar I am with a logical flaw the more it fits the bill
Premise 1. European painters lack skills that were common in the preceding century
Premise 2. In the book out of 100 paintings, 50 old, 50 new, none of the newer paintings are executed as skillfully as the older paintings.
Between 1 and 2 the flawed logic or assumption is that the book accurately
Here's where I get a little hung up.
In logical flaw questions, like strengthen and weaken we assume the answer prompts to be true, correct? I ask because I can see a wide array of answers to such logical flaw problems.
A also makes a lot more sense than B because although we can assume D to be true, the prompt tells us nothing about non-European artists. Then again the prompt doesn't tell us the book talks only about European artists, why could D not legitimately point out that these artists could possibly be non-European and hence the error ie because Euro artists are less skilled than world artists ->why we can't conclude that Euro artists between contemporary and old are not more or less skilled from the book;
Posts: 59
28 Jun 2014, 05:10
Kudos
Bookmarks
I would deal with question .. by understanding the category of the question. Since the passage provides the information that the analysis done on 100 books ... further the division is 50 -50. Hence the correct answer must attack on the representative data that has been used for evaluation. If the argument says the chosen set was partial i.e. they chose those books that were according to thesis .. weaken the argument .. hence must be the correct answer.
14 Jul 2020, 23:25
Kudos
Bookmarks
rounakkedia172
(B) is irrelevant to our argument.
Our argument deals with the skills of the painters and our conclusion talks about the skills only.
(B) would have a valid point if we talked about the skill in the premises but concluded that the older painting are of higher quality or something like that.
You can evaluate a painting based on many criteria. For example:
Technical skills of the painter
Sublimity factor
Beauty of the subject matter chosen
Confluence of objects portrayed
...
Perhaps, all these factors together would make the best paintings. But our argument is not focussed on "the better paintings" or "higher quality paintings".
Our premises tell us that older paintings were made more skilfully and we conclude that last century painters had more skill. All other factors on which two paintings could be compared are irrelevant to this argument.
