Philosopher: Not just any object can be a work of art. If an object

Question

﻿Philosopher: Not just any object can be a work of art. If an object cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view, it is not art. Thus, ordinary thumbtacks, cheap white envelopes, and disposable plastic forks such as those given at some fast-food restaurants cannot qualify as works of art.

Which of the following would, if true, most indicate an error in the philosopher's reasoning?

A. Most theories of art maintain that not all objects that can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view qualify as art.
B. Many art critics question whether various well-known works should be considered works of art.
C. Simply proposing reasons that some objects do not qualify as works of art does not itself establish what objects do qualify as works of art.
D. Some people can evaluate certain objects from an aesthetic point of view that others cannot.
E. Two people can observe the same object and apply different aesthetic evaluations to it.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

Premises:  
Not all objects can be a work of art.
If an object cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view, it is not art.
(implies that 'ability to be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view' is  necessary  to be art)

Conclusion:  
So thumbtacks, envelopes, and plastic forks cannot qualify as works of art.

It is a weaken question. We need to provide additional data which will show us that the author's reasoning is not correct.

A. Most theories of art maintain that not all objects that can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view qualify as art.

This says that most theories say that there may be some objects that can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view but they still may not be art.
This is not an error in the reasoning. The author tells us that it is a necessary condition. He doesn't say anything about sufficiency and hence we don't have to worry about it.

B. Many art critics question whether various well-known works should be considered works of art.

Whether current works of art should be considered so or not is out of scope for us.

C. Simply proposing reasons that some objects do not qualify as works of art does not itself establish what objects do qualify as works of art.

The author is not trying to establish what DOES qualify as art. He is talking about what doesn't qualify.

D. Some people can evaluate certain objects from an aesthetic point of view that others cannot.

This is an error in the reasoning. If some people can evaluate certain objects from an aesthetic point of view that others cannot, then it is possible that objects that the author cannot so evaluate can be so evaluated by others. If that were to happen then the thumbtacks and forks could be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view (by someone other than the author) and hence could qualify as objects of art.
Hence, this is a flaw in the author's reasoning.

E. Two people can observe the same object and apply different aesthetic evaluations to it.

This is not correct. The point is whether the object can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view. If it can be evaluated, then whether two people evaluate it in the same manner or differently is out of scope for us. We are only talking about which objects could qualify as works of art - those that can be evaluated. What kind of evaluation is applied to it is the next step that we needn't worry about.

Answer (D)

gmatophobia · Answer

I think this is a tough one

Principle : If an object cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view, it is not art. Conclusion : Ordinary thumbtacks, cheap white envelopes, and disposable plastic forks such as those given at some fast-food restaurants cannot qualify as works of art. We have to find a flaw in the reasoning. A. Most theories of art maintain that not all objects that can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view qualify as art. This option goes the other way around. The option states that even if an object can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view it may not qualify as an art. The conclusion that we are trying to find a flaw in is " ordinary thumbtacks, cheap white envelopes, and disposable plastic forks such as those given at some fast-food restaurants cannot qualify as works of art ". Hence, we can eliminate this option. B. Many art critics question whether various well-known works should be considered works of art. Not a flaw in the philosopher's argument. The fact that the critics question whether various well-known works should be considered works of art doesn't indicate that the author's argument is at flaw. It indicates that the critics and the philosopher may have different points of view on some well-known works. Hence, we can eliminate this option. C. Simply proposing reasons that some objects do not qualify as works of art does not itself establish what objects do qualify as works of art. Just as in Option A, this Option targets the wrong conclusion. We are trying to find a flaw in the author's reasoning that the author uses to conclude " ordinary thumbtacks, cheap white envelopes, and disposable plastic forks such as those given at some fast-food restaurants cannot qualify as works of art " D. Some people can evaluate certain objects from an aesthetic point of view that others cannot. This is a good one to consider. The philosopher based on the principle concludes that ordinary thumbtacks, cheap white envelopes, and disposable plastic forks such as those given at some fast-food restaurants cannot qualify as works of art. Put otherwise, the philosopher assumes that everyone shares the same scale in evaluating objects from an aesthetic point of view and that no two people will have different opinions. This statement provides us with a different possibility and tells us that some people can evaluate certain objects from an aesthetic point of view that others cannot. Hence, it's possible that what the philosopher considers non-aesthetic and thus not art, can be considered by some other person aesthetic and art. The option does bring out an inherent flaw in the philosopher's reasoning. We can keep this option. E. Two people can observe the same object and apply different aesthetic evaluations to it. Hmm, this is a close one as well

I am a bit skeptical about the word "different aesthetic evaluations". While this option also presents a possibility that the outcome of two different persons can be different and there is no 'universal' scale for evaluating an object, in my opinion, the use of different evaluations can be a factor to eliminate this option. IMO D and E are very close. I will pick D over E (with fingers crossed) GMATNinja KarishmaB - Would love to hear your thoughts on this question. Between D and E, can you please share your reasoning to choose one option over other

mysterymanrog · Answer

A) This does not point out a flaw in the reasoning of the philosopher. The philosopher is not saying that all objects which can be evaluated from an aesthetic PoV are art, but rather the inverse - if an object is art, it can be evaluated from an aesthetic PoV.

B) Not relevant to the argument at hand.

C) Similar to A. The philosopher does not state what disqualifies an object from being a work of art, but rather what qualifies one to be a work of art - C is an inversion of what the author is stating.

D) Good choice.

The author performs the following reasoning:
Are x, y, and z art? 
If x,y, and z is art-> x,y, and z can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view
??? -> x,y, and z is not an object 
??? is the underlying assumption that x,y,z cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view. This is the only way the reasoning of the philosopher works, from the given information in the passage.

D states that "some people can evaluated certain objects from an aesthetic PoV that others cannot". This directly undermines the ??? portion. What if someone who can evaluate these objects form an aesthetic PoV exists? Then clearly, the philosophers chain of reasoning is wrong - ??? is no longer valid, and so he has made a mistake.

E) Not relevant to the argument. The concern is on the application of an aesthetic evaluation, not on what the actual evaluation is.

D is the correct answer.

scrantonstrangler · Answer

D & E are very close.
D talks about a situation where there's an objective difference between 2 people in considering daily objects. That is, whether or not they can be viewed from an aesthetic POV.
E on the other hand talks about the degree of difference in the aesthetic evaludations that two people may have towards the objects.

D says YES or NO. Yes they can be seen from the objective POV or no they cannot.
E says, yes both can be viewed from the aesthetic POV, but there may be a difference.

However, the conclusion discusses aesthetics from an objective point of view.

Hence D.

SergejK · Answer

KarishmaB : Can we say that C attacks the premise?

KarishmaB · Answer

(C) is out of scope.
The author is talking about what doesn't qualify as art. He says if an object cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view, it is not art.
He doesn't tell us what criteria should be met for an object to be considered art. To weaken his argument, you need to say why thumbtacks shouldn't necessarily be eliminated from the art set.
Saying that you are talking about one topic but not about another doesn't weaken the author's conclusion. You would be trying to distract from the discussion at hand. The topic of the debate is "What cannot be called art" so we stick to that.

SergejK · Answer

I think I got it now:

"Not all objects can be a work of art" is a  stated assumption  that acts as a  main point  of the argument. The problem is: if one just focusses on the way a stated assumption is worded, one might  mistake it as the conclusion as it functions as the main point of the argument  and we mostly consider t he main point of the argument to be the conclusion . But this is only because most of the times we are dealing with  unstated assumptions  that lead to the conclusion, which then become the main point of the argument. With a stated assumption, however, the weight of the argument is shifted toward the assumption. And this is actually very logical. What will invalidate the argument is the negation of the assumption as it is always the central point of the argument. In our case and in a very similar case  here , the stated assumption  does not lead to the conclusion but functions as part of the premise , for which  no support is provided . However, it uses similar language like the conclusion so it is easy to misidentify it as one. However, nothing explains the stated assumption,  no additional assumption is possible  to arrive at it. It just uses at times vague language and sometimes presents itself as absolute statement and should be treated as premise.

Because of that there must be other  unstated assumptions  that will lead to a conclusion. In our case, that the objects cannot be considered art because they cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view,  connecting the conclusion in the last sentence with the causal explanation in the second sentence, what can be considered the work of art.  Here, to weaken the conclusion that ordinary objects cannot be considered art, we need to find what we can actually attack. As we know, we are not allowed to attack the premise. However, the premise tells us, what can be considered as art: only objects that can be evaluated from the aesthetic POV. We must consider this to be true. What we can attack is a fact that maybe, there is a different aesthetic POV that the philosopher hasn't considered yet or that not everybody is able to really evaluate the aesthetics of art . -> Choice D

Dbrunik · Answer

This is a high quality question.

Kj321 · Answer

Thanks for the amazing explanation Karishma
i was able to ascertain that D is right but could not somehow eliminate A and E
but your explanation has made it absolutely clear.

Could you possibly provide a link of Necessary Sufficient Reasoning which may be perused to further understand the application of this concept in GMAT CR..

Thanks a Ton

You guys are really doing great service to help distraught GMAT students like us. Hope that makes your day !

Aboyhasnoname · Answer

A tough one...but lets see....

Philosopher: Not just any object can be a work of art. If an object cannot be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view, it is not art.

If Cannot be evaluated from Aesthetic point, then not art.....

Means, If art, then Should be able to be evaluated from Aesthetic pov.... 
Here..If an object is not art, then also it can evaluated from Aesthetic PoV...

Thus, ordinary thumbtacks, cheap white envelopes, and disposable plastic forks such as those given at some fast-food restaurants cannot qualify as works of art.

Here Author Says....that these items cannot be qualified as Art....assumption...that...these cannot be evaluated....

Which of the following would, if true, most indicate an error in the philosopher's reasoning?

A. Most theories of art maintain that not all objects that can be evaluated from an aesthetic point of view qualify as art.
This is reinstating the premise.....not challenging it....author never says that this is not the case..moreover..... We have to consider the principles given by the author to be true..... and stay within that...whatever may be other theories..we have to stay with the theory given by the author

D. Some people can evaluate certain objects from an aesthetic point of view that others cannot.
This weakens ....Means author might not be able to evaluate it..but it can evaluated...so there is a possibility that the objects mentioned can be piece of art.

Philosopher: Not just any object can be a work of art. If an object

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

Philosopher: Not just any object can be a work of art. If an object

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