GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 24 Feb 2020, 05:08

### 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

# The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 144
The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2020, 07:44
IanStewart wrote:
varotkorn wrote:
I am especially confused between Q1. and Q4. versions because technically EVERY has the same meaning as ANY. At first glance, there shouldn't be the difference between Q1. and Q4!

The answers to all of your five questions is 'yes'. The word "every" does not mean the same thing as the word "any", though, which is why your sentence in Q1 means something different from your sentence in Q4. Speaking casually, "every" means "all", while "any" means "one (or more)".

Dear IanStewart,

If "any" means "one (or more)" and "one (or more)" is equivalent to "some", then why Q2 ("some") is not the same as Q4 ("any")?

Also, from grammar perspective, I also don't understand why Q1 ("every") is the same as Q2("some")

Thank you for your help Sir!
_________________
Thank you in advance!
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 2012
Re: The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2020, 08:32
1
I should be more clear, because my last post might be a bit misleading -- "any" is sometimes roughly synonymous with "every" (when "any one" would mean "all"), and sometimes more synonymous with "some", depending on usage:

"I can explain any physics problem" means "I can explain every physics problem"

"Are there any employees who enrolled in the pension plan?" means "Is there one or more employees enrolled in the pension plan?"
_________________
GMAT Tutor in Montreal

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 144
Re: The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jan 2020, 03:55
IanStewart wrote:
I should be more clear, because my last post might be a bit misleading -- "any" is sometimes roughly synonymous with "every" (when "any one" would mean "all"), and sometimes more synonymous with "some", depending on usage:

"I can explain any physics problem" means "I can explain every physics problem"

"Are there any employees who enrolled in the pension plan?" means "Is there one or more employees enrolled in the pension plan?"

Dear IanStewart,

What confuses me most is that
"cannot explain EVERY aesthetic feature" = "cannot explain SOME aesthetic feature"

This is a bit surprising for me to think about it.
Do you have a framework to deal with quantifier with the negation in front of it? Or you just go by with your instinct?

Thank you Sir!
_________________
Thank you in advance!
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 144
The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 01 Feb 2020, 08:45
Dear VeritasKarishma AnthonyRitz IanStewart MartyTargetTestPrep GMATGuruNY GMATNinja VeritasPrepBrian ChiranjeevSingh,

Is this interpretation in choice E. correct?

"NO pre-modern general theory of art explains ANY aesthetic feature of music that is not shared with painting and sculpture."

= ALL pre-modern general theory does NOT explain ANY aesthetic feature of music ...

Here, ANY here means 1 or more, NOT necessarily ALL, right?

Thank you!
_________________
Thank you in advance!

Originally posted by varotkorn on 01 Feb 2020, 03:37.
Last edited by varotkorn on 01 Feb 2020, 08:45, edited 2 times in total.
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 922
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2020, 05:34
1
varotkorn,

No pre-modern general theory of art explains any aesthetic feature of music that is not shared with painting and sculpture.

Just use the negatives to counter each other and you get: pre-modern general theory of art explains any aesthetic feature of music that is shared with painting and sculpture: Aesthetic feature shared with music --> Pre modern art explains it.
_________________
D-Day: November 18th, 2017

My CR Guide: Here
My RC Guide: Here
Need an expert to grade your AWA? Go: Here
Want to know your Business School chances? Go: Here
Want to be a moderator? We may want you to be one! See how: Here
Director
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 536
Schools: Dartmouth College
The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 01 Feb 2020, 11:03
1
E: No pre-modern general theory of art explains any aesthetic feature of music that is not shared with painting and sculpture.

Let's say three are pre-modern general theories (A, B and C) and three aesthetic features of music not shared with painting and sculpture (X, Y and Z).

Answer choice E conveys the following meaning:
Theory A cannot explain X.
Theory A cannot explain Y.
Theory A cannot explain Z.

In short:
Theory A can explain NONE of the three features.
Put another way:
Theory A cannot explain ANY of the three features.

Similarly:
Theory B cannot explain X.
Theory B cannot explain Y.
Theory B cannot explain Z.

In short:
Theory B can explain NONE of the three features.
Put another way:
Theory B cannot explain ANY of the three features.

Lastly:
Theory C cannot explain X.
Theory C cannot explain Y.
Theory C cannot explain Z.

In short:
Theory C can explain NONE of the three features.
Put another way:
Theory C cannot explain ANY of the three features.

The result is the following:
NONE of the three theories can explain ANY of the three features.
In other words:
NO pre-modern theory can explain ANY of the three features.
This is the meaning conveyed by E.

varotkorn wrote:

Is this interpretation in choice E. correct?

"NO pre-modern general theory of art explains ANY aesthetic feature of music that is not shared with painting and sculpture."

= ALL pre-modern general theory does NOT explain ANY aesthetic feature of music ...

Here, ANY here means 1 or more, NOT necessarily ALL, right?

Thank you!

Your understanding seems correct.
_________________
GMAT and GRE Tutor
New York, NY

Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.

Originally posted by GMATGuruNY on 01 Feb 2020, 07:13.
Last edited by GMATGuruNY on 01 Feb 2020, 11:03, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 144
The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2020, 08:10
GMATGuruNY wrote:
Let's say there are three girls in John's school:
Amy, Betty and Cindy

No girl attended John's party.
Here, the number of girls who attended = 0.

All of the girls did not attend John's party.
Here, the number of girls who attended ≤ 2.
It is possible that Amy and Betty attended, but Cindy did not.
It is possible that Amy attended, but Betty and Cindy did not.
We know only the following:
It is not possible that ALL THREE GIRLS -- Amy, Betty and Cindy -- attended.

The statement in red does not convey the same meaning as the statement in blue.

Dear GMATGuruNY,

Thank you for your response.
However, I am a little bit confused on red sentence above.

Please consider analogous examples below:
ALL of marbles are NOT mine.
Is it not the same as NO marbles are mine?

Can ALL of marbles are NOT mine. mean one marble is mine (or perhaps two marbles are mine)?

IMO, ALL of marbles are NOT mine. means ALL are NOT mine.

Similarly, when saying ALL of you are NOT good people!, can this mean one person is still a good person?

==============================================
GMATGuruNY wrote:
All of the girls did not attend John's party.
Here, the number of girls who attended ≤ 2.

PS. I do agree with the above if the sentence were NOT ALL of the girls attended John's party.

Thank you in advance!
_________________
Thank you in advance!
Director
Joined: 04 Aug 2010
Posts: 536
Schools: Dartmouth College
The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2020, 11:12
1
varotkorn wrote:
IMO, ALL of marbles are NOT mine. means ALL are NOT mine.

Your understanding is correct.
Given that we are discussing an LSAT CR, I've corrected my previous response to align better with the rules of formal logic and thus the rules of the LSAT.
For the purposes of the LSAT:
All A's are not B = If A, then not B.
Thus:
All of the marbles are not red = If an object is a marble, then the object is not red.
In other words:
NONE OF THE MARBLES is red.
_________________
GMAT and GRE Tutor
New York, NY

Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10113
Location: Pune, India
Re: The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Feb 2020, 21:41
1
GMATFIGHTER wrote:
The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic feature that is found in any of the arts. Pre-modern general theories of art, however, focused primarily on painting and sculpture. Every pre-modern general theory of art, even those that succeed as theories of painting or sculpture, fails to explain some aesthetic feature of music.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which one of following?

(A) Any general theory of art that explains the aesthetic features of painting also explains those of sculpture.
(B) A general theory of art that explains every aesthetic feature of music will achieve its purpose.
(C) Any theory of art that focus primarily on sculpture or painting cannot explain every aesthetic feature of music.
(D) No pre-modern general theory of art achieves its purpose unless music is not art.
(E) No pre-modern general theory of art explains any aesthetic feature of music that is not shared with painting and sculpture.

Source : PrepTest 36 - December 2001 LSAT #Q17

Quote:
Is this interpretation in choice E. correct?

"NO pre-modern general theory of art explains ANY aesthetic feature of music that is not shared with painting and sculpture."

= ALL pre-modern general theory does NOT explain ANY aesthetic feature of music ...

Here, ANY here means 1 or more, NOT necessarily ALL, right?

Yes, it is. It means:
All pre modern theories do NOT explain even one feature of music that music doesn't share with painting and sculpture.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Re: The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f   [#permalink] 02 Feb 2020, 21:41

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 29 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# The purpose of a general theory of art is to explain every aesthetic f

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne