With the help of infrared spectroscopy, Dutch researchers have determi

Question

With the help of infrared spectroscopy, Dutch researchers have determined that three of Hieronymus Bosch’s surviving panel paintings,  The Wayfarer, The Haywain,  and  The Path of Life , are actually one painting separated into three parts. However, scholars from the Prado Museum remained unconvinced; they asserted that a chemical analysis of the pigments of the paintings does not establish any strong connection among the paintings.

Which of the following, if true, would tend most to weaken the force of the scholars’ objections?

A. There is no recorded evidence that Hieronymus Bosch painted  The Wayfarer, The Haywain,  and  The Path of Life  as a single painting.
B. Panel paintings such as the ones made by Hieronymus Bosch were often split into separate components by later collectors.
C. A chemical analysis of the type of pigments that Hieronymus Bosch used only has the capacity to detect broad similarities in the pigments’ composition.
D. Microscopic analysis of the wood panels that  The Wayfarer, The Haywain,  and  The Path of Life  are painted on has revealed no evidence that panels were ever connected.
E. It is uncertain what parts of Hieronymus Bosch’s oeuvre may have been painted by his assistants rather than by Bosch himself.

This is a  CR Butler Question

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

paragw · Answer

Step 1: Restate the situation
 
 Dutch researchers (using  infrared spectroscopy ) claim the three Bosch panels are parts of one painting. 
 Prado scholars object, saying  chemical pigment analysis  shows no strong connection. 
 The question: Which option most weakens the Prado scholars’ objection?

Step 2: Identify the objection
The Prado scholars’ objection rests on the  authority of chemical pigment analysis . They argue:  since pigments don’t match strongly, the panels aren’t connected. 
So, to weaken their objection, we need something that  undermines the reliability or relevance of pigment analysis  as evidence.

Step 3: Evaluate each option
 A. No recorded evidence Bosch painted them as one painting. 
 
 Irrelevant. This doesn’t weaken the Prado scholars’ objection; it just adds another doubt.  
 B. Panel paintings were often split later. 
 
 Supports the Dutch researchers’ claim, but doesn’t directly weaken the Prado scholars’ pigment-based objection. It’s background, not a counter.  
 C. Chemical analysis of Bosch’s pigments only detects broad similarities. 
 
  Bingo . This directly undermines the Prado scholars’ objection. If pigment analysis is too coarse to establish strong connections, then their objection loses force.  
 D. Microscopic analysis of wood shows no evidence of connection. 
 
 Strengthens the Prado scholars’ objection, not weakens it.  
 E. Uncertainty about assistants painting parts of Bosch’s oeuvre. 
 
 Irrelevant. Doesn’t address pigment analysis or the objection.  
Hence,  C

Dereno · Answer

Leaving the hard facts. Let’s move to the intricacies mentioned in this passage.

There is a painting, but in three panels. The debate is whether the panel is belonging to a single painting, or three separate paintings.

IR spectroscopy done by researchers, say the panels match, so the paintings are same , split to three.

But, scholars chemical analysis reveals a different picture : these are three pictures and not one split to three.

How did the scholars arrive to this conclusion, what’s the basis of this conclusion?

Chemical analysis on the pigments of the paintings doesn’t show any evidence of correlation between these three. So, scholars conclude all three are different paintings.

We need to weaken the scholars conclusion.

A. There is no recorded evidence that Hieronymus Bosch painted  The Wayfarer, The Haywain,  and  The Path of Life  as a single painting.

Whether the specific painter in question has painted it or not is not the core issue. Is three painting panels belong to the same root or not?. So, irrespective of evidence, this fails to weaken the scholar’s conclusion. Wrong.

B. Panel paintings such as the ones made by Hieronymus Bosch were often split into separate components by later collectors.

Since a generalising a work is usually being split into three, doesn’t mean the same logic applies to this particular painting. May be the opposite would have been true. So, wrong.

C. A chemical analysis of the type of pigments that Hieronymus Bosch used only has the capacity to detect broad similarities in the pigments’ composition.

Option C mentions chemical analysis which says about the pigments in broader terms, say their chemical composition, colour proportions and other specific details to justify they are paint pigments - natural or artificial etc. The analysis tool made doesn’t really pick the differences that needs to be studied. So, the basis of chemical analysis report is itself questionable, which leads to the outcome more debatable. Correct weakening option.

D. Microscopic analysis of the wood panels that  The Wayfarer, The Haywain,  and  The Path of Life  are painted on has revealed no evidence that panels were ever connected.

This actually strengthens the scholars claim, that the three panels are different. Hence, Wrong.

E. It is uncertain what parts of Hieronymus Bosch’s oeuvre may have been painted by his assistants rather than by Bosch himself.

This option brings a new dimension to the problem, the painting is painted by someone else. We are not concerned with who has painted, but are the three paintings belong to one piece or not. Hence, wrong.

Option C

arushi118 · Answer

C is correct as it weakens the force as it undermines the reliability of chemical pigment analysis as evidence against the paintings being connected.

vasu1104 · Answer

researchers said that three paintings of Bosch are one painting seperated into 3 parts. they said this with the help of infrared spectroscopy. 
 scholars remained unconvinced. they said chemical analysis does not establish strong connection among paintings.

schoolars are assuming that for all 3 parts to be of one paintings, chemical analysis has to be match or one chemical needs to be used for all three parts.

A this is irrelevant and is talking about recorded evidence. 
 B even if this has happened, the chemical analysis can be similar. so we dont know anything about this. so this cant be necessary weakner. 
 C so if only the pigments used by bosch has the capacity to detect similarities then researchers claim is right and scholars view get asttacked. because we dont what parts chemical analysis they have done. but if just consider chemical analysis of used pig then the researches conclusion is valid and weaken the scholars idea 
 D this strengthen scholars view though 
 E this is out of scope.

ans C

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Video explanation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zg6OlOTawIw

With the help of infrared spectroscopy, Dutch researchers have determi

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

With the help of infrared spectroscopy, Dutch researchers have determi

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