The extent to which a society is really free can be gauged by its

Question

The extent to which a society is really free can be gauged by its attitude toward artistic expression. Freedom of expression can easily be violated in even the most outwardly democratic of societies. When a government arts council withholds funding from a dance performance that its members deem "obscene," the voices of a few bureaucrats have in fact censored the work of the choreographer, thereby committing the real obscenity of repression.

Which of the following, if true, would most, seriously weaken the argument above?

A. Members of government arts councils are screened to ensure that their beliefs reflect those of the majority.

B. The term obscenity has several different definitions that should not be used interchangeably for rhetorical effect.

C. Failing to provide financial support for a performance is not the same as actively preventing or inhibiting it.

D. The council's decision could be reversed if the performance were altered to conform to public standards of appropriateness.

E. The definition of obscenity is something on which most members of a society can agree.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:
 
  Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler

HumanRep · Answer

C because if we negate option C and then check it would strengthen the argument.

FerociousStorm · Answer

The main argument is that government holds funding from dance performances as they deem it obscene and thus repress it.
Additional point- Few bureaucrats have led to this repression

B D and E are irrelevant

Option A negates the second point BUT option C completely negates the main argument so C most seriously weakens it

correct answer is C imo

dhart · Answer

A. Members of government arts councils are screened to ensure that their beliefs reflect those of the majority.
 Reflecting general of belief of majority os away from conlusion

B. The term obscenity has several different definitions that should not be used interchangeably for rhetorical effect.
 Just changing the usage of word obscenity make it lighter ,doesn't weaken the conclusion of and preveting free expression

C. Failing to provide financial support for a performance is not the same as actively preventing or inhibiting it.

Yes, faling to provide financial support and preventing or inhibiting the perfoamce is different thing , the conclusion is about preventing artistic expression and

D. The council's decision could be reversed if the performance were altered to conform to public standards of appropriateness.
Irrelevant

E. The definition of obscenity is something on which most members of a society can agree.
Irrelevant
imo c

Minka99 · Answer

This was an easy  C , since we have to weaken the conclusion that  withholding funds from a dance performance deemed "obscene," is to the same effect as prohibiting it . Freedom of expression means that you are allowed to express yourself in any manner, broadly speaking. Even if you are not receiving funding for it.
A) there is nothing in the passage that states that the majority being represented opinion-wise is some kind of rule
B) we are not concerned with the actual definition of obscenity, no mention of this specifically in the passage
C) CORRECT no funding ≠ prohibition
D) well this sounds like it would strengthen the conclusion in the passage because it implies that if you play by the accepted rules you profit (≠ freedom of expression)
E) again, same as B, not relevant

Vivek1707 · Answer

A. Even if the council reflects the majority's beliefs, withholding funding could still be censorship.
B. The argument's problem isn't the meaning of "obscenity." It's whether withholding funding counts as censorship.
C. Correct If not funding a performance is different from actually preventing or inhibiting it, then the council hasn't necessarily censored the choreographer. This directly attacks the argument's main assumption.
D. If the performance can get funding after being changed, that actually supports the idea that the council is restricting artistic expression.
E. Whether society agrees on what is obscene doesn't address whether withholding funding constitutes censorship.

Groot2076 · Answer

A. Even if the council reflects the majority's beliefs, withholding funding could still be censorship.
B. The argument's problem isn't the meaning of "obscenity." It's whether withholding funding counts as censorship.
C. Correct If not funding a performance is different from actually preventing or inhibiting it, then the council hasn't necessarily censored the choreographer. This directly attacks the argument's main assumption.
D. If the performance can get funding after being changed, that actually supports the idea that the council is restricting artistic expression.
E. Whether society agrees on what is obscene doesn't address whether withholding funding constitutes censorship.

/forum/report.php?f=139&p=3830463

The extent to which a society is really free can be gauged by its

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

­The extent to which a society is really free can be gauged by its

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

The extent to which a society is really free can be gauged by its