Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr

Question

Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in providing an understanding of all art, including early abstract art, until the 1960s, when artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art. Since the work of these rebellious artists is quite beautiful but outside the bounds of the aesthetic theory then current, there can be no complete theory of aesthetics.

The reasoning above is most vulnerable to criticism in that it

(A) takes for granted that it is more important for a complete aesthetic theory to account for the beauty of traditional art than for it to account for the beauty of self-consciously rebellious art

(B) presumes, without providing justification, that artists’ rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was not guided by their knowledge of eighteenth century European aesthetic theory

(C) presumes, without providing justification, that an aesthetic theory developed in one part of the world cannot be applied in another

(D) presumes, without providing justification, that art from the 1960s is the only art that cannot be adequately addressed by eighteenth- century European aesthetics

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that eighteenth-century European aesthetics is as encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT

Hmm. I was following along with this one until I got to the conclusion, which is total crap. The logic goes like this: “We had it all figured out until the 60s, but then some new **** came to light and we realized we didn’t have it all figured out. Therefore we will  never  figure it out.” Wait, why not?

We’re asked to criticize the argument. My critique is, “You’ve assumed that just because we don’t currently have a complete theory, we will never have a complete theory. You’re making a totally unwarranted prediction about the future. You can’t predict the future, dumbass.”

A) No, it’s not about what’s “important” in art criticism. It’s about whether or not this guy can predict the future.

B) Huh? Not what we’re looking for.

C) Nope. Still looking for “this guy tried to predict the future.”

D) Nope, still looking.

E) There we go. This one is closest to what we predicted, because it says, “You assume we’ll never have a better theory in the future.”

Our answer is E.

ash124 · Answer

Understand the Argument:

Premise:  Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was  reasonably  successful in providing an understanding of all art, including early abstract art, until the 1960s, when artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art. Since the work of these rebellious artists is quite beautiful but outside the bounds of the aesthetic theory then current,

Conclusion:  there can be no complete theory of aesthetics.

The reasoning above is most vulnerable to criticism in that it?

(A) takes for granted that it is more important for a complete aesthetic theory to account for the beauty of traditional art than for it to account for the beauty of self-consciously rebellious art
Comparing the importance of the beauty of traditional art with that of self-consciously rebellious art
 out of scope

(B) presumes, without providing justification, that artists’ rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was not guided by their knowledge of eighteenth century European aesthetic theory
 If it is guided then Theory can be a complete theory

(C) presumes, without providing justification, that an aesthetic theory developed in one part of the world cannot be applied in another
 parts of the world are out of scope

(D) presumes, without providing justification, that art from the 1960s is the only art that cannot be adequately addressed by eighteenth- century European aesthetics
 It is not about only art

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that eighteenth-century European aesthetics is as encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be
 The argument is more about the complete theory of aesthetics

Answer B

Sumi1010 · Answer

Let's make the acronyms for such long jargons first.

Eighteenth-century European aesthetics -- EA
theory of aesthetics = aesthetic theory -- AT

Premise:  EA was reasonably successful until 1960, when artists rebelled against it. 
 Conclusion:  Since the work of rebellious artists was beyond the  then  AT, there can be no  complete  AT.

What's wrong with the conclusion? 
It says that :  Then-AT failed, so there will be no AT ever.  
Such a strong toned conclusion can easily be attacked.

(A) takes for granted that it is  more important  for a complete aesthetic theory to account for the  beauty of traditional art than  for it to account for  the beauty of self-consciously rebellious artists 
 The complete-AT should have included the work of rebellious artists (that's why the artists rebelled) . 
The argument is not about "importance" of one over another.  
(B) presumes, without providing justification, that artists’ rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was  not guided  by their knowledge of eighteenth century European aesthetic theory
 The problem just states that "artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art". 
Look at the word "guided". Whether it was guided by EA or not - does not matter. 
(C) presumes, without providing justification, that an aesthetic theory developed in  one part of the world cannot be applied  in another
 This geographical difference on application is not mentioned. 
(D) presumes, without providing justification, that art from the 1960s is  the only art  that cannot be adequately addressed by eighteenth- century European aesthetics
 I don't know about other arts. 
(E) presumes, without providing justification, that eighteenth-century European aesthetics is  as encompassing as  an aesthetic theory can be
  Then-AT failed, so there will be no AT ever  (as any AT will fail as then-AT failed). 
This is what the conclusion's mistake.

IMO  E

100mitra · Answer

Correct option E

Premise: 
 Before : European aesthetics was inside the bounds of aesthetic theory, including abstract art.
 After:  1960s, when artists self-consciously rebelled against earlier notions of art. 
- the work of these rebellious artists is quite beautiful 
- outside the bounds of the aesthetic theory than current, 
 Conclusion:  there can be no complete theory of aesthetics.
 Assumption:  only European aesthetics theory could successfully encompass all Art ever before 1800c

The reasoning above is  most vulnerable to criticism  in that it

(A) takes for granted that 
- it is more important for a complete aesthetic theory 
- to account for the beauty of traditional art than for it 
- to account for the beauty of self-consciously rebellious art
 Wrong:  Irrelevant to conclusion, comparison between “beauty”, not about rebelled artists of 1900c and artists before 1800c

(B) presumes, without providing justification, that 
artists’ rebellion in the 1960s against earlier notions of art was 
not guided by their knowledge of 1800c century European aesthetic theory
 Wrong:  this actually focus on why rebellious artists, not been guided by 1800c artists, still ended with outside the bound of aesthetic theory, which is not logically apply to conclusion or authors assumption.

(C) presumes, without providing justification, that 
- an aesthetic theory developed in one part of the world 
- cannot be applied in another
 Wrong:  Why? 1800c to 1900c to another world, makes this not relevant to reach to find any flaw to conclusion

(D) presumes, without providing justification, that
- art from the 1960s is the only art that 
- cannot be adequately addressed by 1800c European aesthetics
 Wrong:  This actually some sense makes conclusion strengthen, because it indicates 1960s art was beautiful, and superior than 1800c

(E) presumes, without providing justification, that 
- 1800c European aesthetics is as 
- encompassing as an aesthetic theory can be
 Correct:  as encompassing as aesthetic theory! , this raise the flaw and criticism, if it was, why would artists raise rebel, counter the earlier art, and find an alternate outbound aesthetic theory than earlier one and still end up with beautiful one

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr

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

Eighteenth-century European aesthetics was reasonably successful in pr

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