Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 May 2017, 09:03

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2007, 04:09
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 11 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 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.

Which one of the following principles, if accepted, would contribute most to Shannaâ€™s defense of her position against that of Jorge?
(A) Truly great works of art are never morally or aesthetically distasteful to any serious student of the history of art.
(B) The right of future generations to have their artistic heritage preserved is of greater importance than the rights of any presently living individual.
(C) It would be imprudent to allow the present stock of artworks to be destroyed without some guarantee that the artists of the future will produce works as great as those produced in the past.
(D) There are certain entities over which no one would be ethically justified in claiming absolute rights to ownership.
(E) The autonomy of individuals to do what they wish with what is theirs must not be compromised, in the absence of a threat to anyoneâ€™s health or safety.

OA is E

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.

OA is A
If you have any questions
New!
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 297
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2007, 05:29
We have a clear E here.

The argument is about the nature of personal ownership. Who really owns what. Does a work of art belong to society, or does it belong to the legal owner.

E is the only one that deals with Shanna's case which is, personal ownership trumps societies ownership...Shanna is clearly not a communist.
Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2007, 05:58
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 271
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2007, 06:49
S - owners have the right to distroy any artwork - distasteful, or no time to take care of it
J - Owners can posses but not destroy. Preserve it regardless of what the owner thinks.

E - Good one - Supports the fact that the individual is the autonomous decision maker and that should not be compromised.
D - Against - No one has absolute rights of ownership over certain entities...
C - Irrelevant
B - Out of Scope
A - Out of Scope

Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2007, 07:55
AXL -> how about the second one?
Manager
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 212
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2007, 20:41
Second one is tricky.
At first I got E, which is incorrect. Because Shanna insists "...if they find morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient...", "tired", in E, is not included.
However, in A, "in an unflattering light " fits.
Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 747
Location: Dallas, Texas
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Mar 2007, 01:30
If you post the answer, you will never see a good debate or discussion.

(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.

CORRECT - They are arguing whether a person has the right to destroy a work of art whenever he/she wishes for whatever reasons.

(B) People who own aesthetically valuable works of art have no moral obligation to make them available for public viewing.

They are not talking about public access.

(C) Valuable paintings by well-known artists are seldom intentionally damaged or destroyed by their owners.

Not arguing how often well-known artists' works are destroyed intentionally.

(D) If a piece of sculpture is not unique, its owner has no ethical obligation to preserve it if doing so proves burdensome.

They are arguing about the right to destroy any owrk of art irrespective of its uniqueness

(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.

No discussion of "legal" stuff. debate is over moral and ethics.
_________________

"Education is what remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 165
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

17 Mar 2007, 03:27
Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of ownership, ethically have the right to destroy that artwork if they find 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.

From the above discussion, it is clear that Jorge favors conservation of "unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value". He, however, has not expressed any POV on works of art that may not be unique, or which do not have aesthetic value. By no stretch of imagination can we infer that a "portrait presenting father in an unflattering light" is either aesthetic or carries some historic value. Hence Shanna and Jorge are unlikely to disagree on destroying the portrait. A cannot be the answer then.

Statement D is consistent with line of thinking of both Jorge and Shanna. Hence I feel D should be the answer, irrespective of what is given as OA
Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2016
Posts: 152
Location: China
Concentration: Healthcare, Entrepreneurship
WE: Sales (Health Care)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 10

Re: Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Dec 2016, 19:38
wudy wrote:
Second one is tricky.
At first I got E, which is incorrect. Because Shanna insists "...if they find morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient...", "tired", in E, is not included.
However, in A, "in an unflattering light " fits.

understood what u mean by A thx a lot
_________________

LSAT CR is driving me mad

Re: Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of   [#permalink] 09 Dec 2016, 19:38
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Owners of any work of art 1 24 Jan 2017, 23:51
4 Owners of any work of art 13 19 Feb 2017, 05:46
Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simply by virtue of 7 01 Mar 2012, 06:15
15 The recording industry is fighting a losing battle: it simply does not 23 09 Mar 2016, 20:00
13 Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited 16 16 Sep 2016, 08:27
Display posts from previous: Sort by