Some critics claim that it is unfair that so many great works of art

Question

Competition Mode Question

Some critics claim that it is unfair that so many great works of art are housed in huge metropolitan museums, since the populations served by these museums already have access to a wide variety of important artwork. But this criticism is in principle unwarranted because the limited number of masterpieces makes wider distribution of them impractical. Besides, if a masterpiece is to be fully appreciated, it must be seen alongside other works that provide a social and historical context for it.

Which one of the following, if established, could most logically serve as the principle appealed to in the argument countering the critics’ claim?

(A) In providing facilities to the public, the goal should be to ensure that as many as possible of those people who could benefit from the facilities are able to do so.

(B) In providing facilities to the public, the goal should be to ensure that the greatest possible number of people gain the greatest benefit possible from them.

(C) It is unreasonable to enforce a redistribution of social goods that involves depriving some members of society of these goods in order to supply others.

(D) For it to be reasonable to criticize an arrangement as unfair, there must be a more equitable arrangement that is practically attainable.

(E) A work of art should be displayed in conditions resembling as closely as possible those in which the work was originally intended to be displayed.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

(A) No. The argument challenges those critics who believe that more great works of art should be displayed outside large metropolitan areas. The basis of this challenge is twofold: 1) since only a limited number great works of art exists, distribution of these works of art outside of metropolitan museums is impractical; 2) masterpieces are best appreciated in the context of other works of art of the same era, which is more likely in “ huge metropolitan museums .” The principle in this answer-choice is not espoused by the author of the argument. It is the critics who would likely hold this principle since they believe it is unfair that “ the populations served by   museums already have access to a wide variety of important artwork. ”

(B) No. This is the second-best choice. The argument challenges those critics who believe that more great works of art should be displayed outside large metropolitan areas. The basis of this challenge is twofold: 1) the critic’s position “is in principle unwarranted because the limited number of masterpieces makes wider distribution of them impractical”; 2) masterpieces are best appreciated in the context of other works of art of the same era, which is more likely in “ huge metropolitan museums. ” The principle in this answer-choice is not espoused by the author of the argument. It is the critics who would likely hold this principle since they believe it is unfair that “ the populations served by   museums already have access to a wide variety of important artwork. ” Although this answer-choice might support the second point, does not serve as the principle of the first point.

(C) No. The argument challenges those critics who believe that more great works of art should be displayed outside large metropolitan areas. The author responds to these critics by claiming that their desire to redistribute masterpieces is “ in principle unwarranted because the limited number of masterpieces makes wider distribution of them impractical .” In other words, no matter how inequitable a situation is, criticism of that situation is warranted only if a better arrangement is practical. The appropriateness of redistribution that deprives some people for the benefit of others is not discussed.

(D) Yes.  The argument challenges those critics who believe that more great works of art should be displayed outside large metropolitan areas. The author responds to these critics by claiming that their desire to redistribute masterpieces is “ in principle unwarranted because the limited number of masterpieces makes wider distribution of them impractical. ” In other words, no matter how inequitable a situation is, criticism of that situation is warranted only if a better arrangement is practical.

(E) No. Although the author does believe that great works of art are best seen in surroundings that depict the social and historical situation in which they were created, such surroundings are not necessarily those that the artist had intended. Regardless, this point is not relevant to the principle the author uses to establish her position.

exc4libur · Answer

ARGUMENT
  It is unfair that many art works are in metro museums, since those served already have access to many works;
  This is unwarranted, because the limited number of works makes it impractical to wide distribution;
  Also, great works to be fully appreciated must be seen alongside others that provide context.

PRINCIPLE
(A) irev;
(B) irev;
(C) this is not the principle the author appealed to;
(E) "conditions" is not the same as displaying works alongside others that provide context.

Ans (D)  since it is impractical to distribute works of art, then the critic's argument that such is unfair is unwarranted.

ostrick5465 · Answer

"Some critics claim that  it is unfair that so many great works of art are housed in huge metropolitan museums "
"But this criticism is in principle unwarranted because the limited number of masterpieces  makes a wider distribution of them impractical ."

(D) For it to be reasonable to criticize an arrangement as unfair,  there must be a more equitable arrangement that is practically attainable.

=>  Choice D

eakabuah · Answer

The right answer is D.

Premise: Some critics claim that it is unfair that so many great works of art are housed in huge metropolitan museums, since the populations served by these museums already have access to a wide variety of important artwork.
Counter-premise: The limited number of masterpieces makes a wider distribution of them impractical. Besides, if a masterpiece is to be fully appreciated, it must be seen alongside other works that provide a social and historical context for it.
Conclusion: This criticism is in principle unwarranted.

Per the argument above, some critics claim that the placement of many great works of art in huge metropolitan museums is unfair on the basis that the audience of these museums already has access to a variety of important artwork. But the author says that this criticism is unwarranted. Why? The number of great works of art are limited, thereby making their wider circulation impractical. The author proceeds further by providing a justification as to why the placement of the artworks in the metropolitan museums.

We are to determine which answer choice, if established, could most logically serve as the principle appealed to in the argument countering the critics’ claim.

Option D states that for it to be reasonable to criticize an arrangement as unfair, there must be a more equitable arrangement that is practically attainable. This is the right answer. The author basically rejects the criticism of the critics that the placement of the masterpieces in Metropolitan museums is unfair because in his/her view, there is no better alternative to the current placement. The limited number of artworks means they cannot be widely circulated and the artworks would derive better value if they are placed beside other works that provide historical and social context to them.

(A) In providing facilities to the public, the goal should be to ensure that as many as possible of those people who could benefit from the facilities are able to do so.
This is not correct because the argument made by the author does not proceed in the manner stated in A. At best, A seems to somehow strengthen the position of the critics.

(B) In providing facilities to the public, the goal should be to ensure that the greatest possible number of people gain the greatest benefit possible from them.
B is incorrect for the same reason as A is incorrect.

(C) It is unreasonable to enforce a redistribution of social goods that involves depriving some members of society of these goods in order to supply others.
This does not in anyway mimic the principle applied by the author to counter the argument made by the critics.

(E) A work of art should be displayed in conditions resembling as closely as possible those in which the work was originally intended to be displayed.
E resembles the second premise provided by the author to justify the placement of the artworks in Metropolitan Museums, but this is not the main criticism provided to counter the argument made by the critics. E is therefore not the right answer.

sarvesh93sah · Answer

Critics  say that displaying art in museums located in the metropolitan cities makes the art accessible for the people who already have access to similar artworks.

The  author   says that a limited number of works makes it impossible to distribute them in different places, also he adds that artwork can be appreciated & better understood if it is placed alongside similar works.

The question asks us to find the option that logically supports the authors claim,

Answer choice analysis:
a) This choice supports the critics claim that the work should be available to the vast majority of audiences (Wrong)
b) Similar to choice a (Wrong)
c) Similar to critics reasoning (wrong)
d) This choice says that to prove something as unfair, it should be done contrasting it with a feasible alternate Idea.
This is not what the author says. (Wrong)
e) Similar to the author's line of reasoning. (Correct)

madgmat2019 · Answer

(D) For it to be reasonable to criticize an arrangement as unfair, there must be a more equitable arrangement that is practically attainable.......clearly counters the claim made by the critics which is impractical and not clear

OA:D

OA:D

auradediligodo · Answer

Some critics claim that it is unfair that so many great works of art are housed in huge metropolitan museums, since the populations served by these museums already have access to a wide variety of important artwork. But this criticism is in principle unwarranted because the limited number of masterpieces makes wider distribution of them impractical. Besides, if a masterpiece is to be fully appreciated, it must be seen alongside other works that provide a social and historical context for it.

Which one of the following, if established, could most logically serve as the principle appealed to in the argument countering the critics’ claim?
 
  Weaken/strengthen question

Pre-thinking

Some critics think that the current way of arranging art is not fair because art should be better distributed. 
The counter claim states that it would be impractical to do so and that there would be some disadvantage in not having more art pieces in a single place.

Let's analyze the options here

POE:

(A) In providing facilities to the public, the goal should be to ensure that as many as possible of those people who could benefit from the facilities are able to do so.
 The number of people is out of scope here

(B) In providing facilities to the public, the goal should be to ensure that the greatest possible number of people gain the greatest benefit possible from them.
 the argument does not talk about maximizing anything. Plus we do not know whether the critics plan would ensure or not that a significant number of people would see the art works. The author criticizes the critics only on the practicability of their plan.

(C) It is unreasonable to enforce a redistribution of social goods that involves depriving some members of society of these goods in order to supply others.
 irrelevant

(D)   For it to be reasonable to criticize an arrangement as unfair, there must be a more equitable arrangement that is practically attainable.
 This option works as a weakener of the critics plan. In fact the critics just say that it is unfair that many pieces of art are all in the same place but they do not offer a valid alternative to repair to the situation

(E) A work of art should be displayed in conditions resembling as closely as possible those in which the work was originally intended to be displayed.
 out of scope

unraveled · Answer

This is a tough one.
Here Question is basically asking to look for something that goes against critics claim i.e. weakens it. A point to note author here goes against critics claim. A catch here might be that we may think of going with the author but it is not necessary that it would be against critics claim.

So, we must look specifically into critics claim to weaken it. Critics claim as put forth by author here is that they are in favor of more people being able to use it as it is unfair since people who already have access to important artwork are being serve by the museums.

A and B are strengtheners, B being larger in scale with a slight variety in approach. 
C talks something on moral grounds which is anyhow wrong. Hence irrelevant.
E basically goes against author's opinion instead of critics'.

D is the answer since author's opinion was against critics' considering practicality and here D does say that what critics say should be practical, one of the two things that author talks about.

IMO Answer D.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Some critics claim that it is unfair that so many great works of art

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Some critics claim that it is unfair that so many great works of art

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards