Walter: A copy of an artwork should be worth exactly what the original

Question

Walter: A copy of an artwork should be worth exactly what the original is worth if the two works are visually indistinguishable. After all, if the two works are visually indistinguishable, they have all the same qualities, and if they have all the same qualities, their prices should be equal.

Marissa: How little you understand art! Even if someone could make a perfect copy that is visually indistinguishable from the original, the copy would have a different history and hence not have all the same qualities as the original.

Which of the following is a point at issue between Walter and Marissa?

(A) Whether a copy of an artwork could ever be visually indistinguishable from the original
(B) Whether the reproduction of a work of art is ever worth more than the original is worth
(C) Whether a copy of a work of art is ever mistaken for the original
(D) Whether a copy of a work of art could have all the same qualities as the original
(E) Whether originality is the only valuable attribute that a work of art can possess

Same passage with different question  LINK

gmatexam439 · Answer

Awaiting OA. IMO answer should be D.

Walter: A copy of an artwork should be worth exactly what the original is worth if the two works are visually indistinguishable. After all, if the two works are visually indistinguishable, they have all the same qualities, and if they have all the same qualities, their prices should be equal.

Marissa: How little you understand art! Even if someone could make a perfect copy that is visually indistinguishable from the original, the copy would have a different history and hence not have all the same qualities as the original.

Which of the following is a point at issue between Walter and Marissa?

(A) Whether a copy of an artwork could ever be visually indistinguishable from the original -- This is not the point of conflict. We can infer this when Marissa states that "even if the 2 works are visually indistinguishable" 
(B) Whether the reproduction of a work of art is ever worth more than the original is worth -- This could have been a good contender if this option stated "work of art is EQUAL to the original"  
(C) Whether a copy of a work of art is ever mistaken for the original -- Nope 
(D) Whether a copy of a work of art could have all the same qualities as the original -- Correct. 
(E) Whether originality is the only valuable attribute that a work of art can possess -- They are not discussing attributes

stickman · Answer

Should be  D . Awaiting OA.

(A) Whether a copy of an artwork could ever be visually indistinguishable from the original
 Incorrect. 'Could ever' we don't know, no mention of this.

(B) Whether the reproduction of a work of art is ever worth more than the original is worth
 Incorrect. Tempting, let's keep this, until a better comes along. 
Found D. We can get rid of B because the crux of the argument is that she is arguing against the reasoning of what he has provided. Not the final conclusion itself.

(C) Whether a copy of a work of art is ever mistaken for the original
 Incorrect. No mention of it being 'mistaken'. Both are arguing about the copies.

(D) Whether a copy of a work of art could have all the same qualities as the original
 Correct. Hits the nail on the head. She argues that they can't be original, while he says that because they are indistinguishable they are original.

(E) Whether originality is the only valuable attribute that a work of art can possess
 Incorrect. No mention of this - we don't know.

adkikani · Answer

GMATNinja   VeritasPrepKarishma

Can experts help to eliminate (B) over (D) ?

Abhishek009 · Answer

Take it this way

(B) talks that : The worth of reproduced work of art > The worth of original , which is contrary to the highlighted part of the stimulus....

GMATNinja · Answer

Thanks Abhishek009 for the explanation! Tossing in an extra two cents, just for fun...

According to Walter, two works that are visually indistinguishable have "all the same qualities." According to Marissa, even if the original and a copy ARE visually indistinguishable, "the copy would have a different history and hence not have the same qualities as the original." So, according to Walter, a copy of a work of art COULD have all the same qualities as the original. But according to Marissa, a copy of a work of art could NOT have all the same qualities as the original. Choice (D) perfectly describes the point at issue. As for (B), neither person claims that a copy is ever worth MORE than the original. Walter only suggests that a copy could be worth just as much as the original, so (B) is out. I hope this helps!

KyleWiddison · Answer

A - Even though Marissa does cast doubt on the ability of a copy to be visually indistinguishable, the main point is about the underlying qualities, outside visual appearance, of works of art

B - The argument is whether a copy could be worth AS MUCH AS, not more than, the original

C - Not at issue in the argument

D - Correct - The core of the argument is whether a copy can have all the same qualities of the original work of art and therefore have the same value. Walter asserts that visual appearances contain all qualities while Marissa introduces the underlying qualities (i.e. history) which give original works of art different qualities than copies.

E - originality is a term not introduced in the argument (it's a variant of original but the words have different meaning), we are discussing the qualities of original vs. copy

adityaschauhan · Answer

someone please me by eliminating E over D.
#(D) Whether a copy of a work of art could have all the same qualities as the original
-- this looks good.

#(E) Whether originality is the only valuable attribute that a work of art can possess
-- "the copy would have a different history and hence not have all the same qualities as the original."  , this all stuff mentioned can be called as Attribute, so why D? I agree D used Qualities directly, but is there any one reason to eliminate E?

Raman109 · Answer

Understanding the argument -
Walter: A copy of an artwork should be worth exactly what the original is worth if the two works are visually indistinguishable. - Opinion. It's based on the assumption that if they are "visually indistinguishable," then they possess all the qualities.
After all, if the two works are visually indistinguishable, they have all the same qualities, and if they have all the same qualities, their prices should be equal. - This is a conditional. Walter asserts that "being visually indistinguishable" is a sufficient condition or enough for the two works to have all the same qualities. Meaning "being visually indistinguishable" 100% guarantees "all the same qualities." See the usage of Zero conditional to express the universal truths or facts.

Marissa: How little you understand art! Even if someone could make a perfect copy that is visually indistinguishable from the original, the copy would have a different history and hence not have all the same qualities as the original. - Marissa challenges the "sufficiency" condition. She says even if "they are visually indistinguishable," it doesn't guarantee 100% that "they possess all qualities." She substantiates this by saying that "they could have a different history." Maybe the original one is 500 years old and has gone through the test of time, while the copy is just one year old and has been kept in all the controlled environments.

Option Elimination - Flaw

(A) Whether a copy of an artwork could ever be visually indistinguishable from the original - It can be, and that is not an issue between Marissa and Walter. Distortion.

(B) Whether the reproduction of a work of art is ever worth more than the original is worth - "worth more than the original" is out of scope.

(C) Whether a copy of a work of art is ever mistaken for the original - It can be, and that is not an issue between Marissa and Walter. Distortion.

(D) Whether a copy of a work of art could have all the same qualities as the original - yes. While Walter believes that is the case, Marissa challenges that aspect.

(E) Whether originality is the only valuable attribute that a work of art can possess - "originality" as a minimum condition for it to be valuable is not disputed. This is out of scope.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Walter: A copy of an artwork should be worth exactly what the original

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

Walter: A copy of an artwork should be worth exactly what the original

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