kuldeepkrlhd
Xavier: Demand by tourists in Nepal for inexpensive thangka paintings has resulted in the
proliferation of inferior thangkas containing symbolic inaccuracies—a sure sign of a
dying art form. Nepal should prohibit sales of thangkas to tourists, for such a prohibition
will induce artists to create thangkas that meet traditional standards.
Yvette: An art form without dedicated young artists will decay and die. If tourists were
forbidden to buy thangkas, young artists would cease making thangkas and concentrate
instead on an art form tourists can buy.
Yvette responds to Xavier by
(A) denying the existence of the problem that Xavier's proposal is designed to ameliorate
(B) challenging the integrity of Xavier's sources of information
(C) arguing that Xavier's proposal, if implemented, would result in the very consequences it is
meant to prevent
(D) using an analogy to draw a conclusion that is inconsistent with the conclusion drawn by
Xavier
(E) showing that the evidence presented by Xavier has no bearing on the point at issue
can someone explain?
GMATNinja,
KarishmaB,
sayantanc2kMethod question.
Xavier: Tourists want inexpensive thank paintings.
But they contain symbolic inaccuracies - so this art form is dying (when it loses its accuracy, it will die)
Conclusion: Prohibit sale of thangka to tourists so that artists focus on making accurate thangka paintings.
Yvette:If tourists were forbidden to buy thangkas, young artists will stop making them (and start making other art forms that tourists can buy)
Without dedicated young artists, an art form will decay and die.
So how does Yvette respond to Xavier? Xavier says that thangka is dying so stop sale to tourists.
Yvette says that if you stop sale to tourists, young artists will stop making it and then thangka will die.
So basically, Yvette is saying that what you are trying to avoid (thangka dying) will actually happen if your proposal (ban tourists from buying) is implemented.
Hence option (C) is perfect.
(A) denying the existence of the problem that Xavier's proposal is designed to ameliorateDoesn't deny that thangka paintings have inaccuracies which is causing them to die. Just says that the proposal suggested by Xavier is not appropriate.
(B) challenging the integrity of Xavier's sources of informationNot challenging Xavier's sources of info. Again, only challenging his suggestion.
(D) using an analogy to draw a conclusion that is inconsistent with the conclusion drawn by
XavierNo analogy used.
(E) showing that the evidence presented by Xavier has no bearing on the point at issueDoes not say that inexpensive thangka paintings do not have inaccuracies.
Answer (C)