CR 1000

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 400
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:04 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

CR 1000

by f2001290 » Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:54 pm
There is little point in looking to artists for insights into political issues. Most of them hold political views that are less insightful than those of any reasonably well-educated person who is not an artist. Indeed, when taken as a whole, the statements made by artists, including those considered to be great, indicate that artistic talent and political insight are rarely found together.
Which one of the following can be inferred from the passage?
(A) There are no artists who have insights into political issues.
(B) A thorough education in art makes a person reasonably well educated.
(C) Every reasonably well-educated person who s not an artist has more insight into political issues than any artist.
(D) Politicians rarely have any artistic talent.
(E) Some artists are no less politically insightful than some reasonably well-educated persons who are not artists.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 127
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:35 am
Thanked: 1 times

by arocks » Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:06 am
IMO - D

(A) There are no artists who have insights into political issues. - It is mentioned they are less insightful...
(B) A thorough education in art makes a person reasonably well educated. - Not relevant
(C) Every reasonably well-educated person who s not an artist has more insight into political issues than any artist. - Every? or majority...??
(E) Some artists are no less politically insightful than some reasonably well-educated persons who are not artists. - could be...but can not be derived from the passage...

As far as D is concerned...if you look at the last statement of the passage -
"...artistic talent and political insight are rarely found together"
In other words....(D) Politicians rarely have any artistic talent.

What do you think? What's the OA?

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:53 am
Thanked: 2 times

by jan08 » Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:42 pm
agreed with arocks...OA please?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:33 am
Thanked: 10 times

by sankruth » Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:31 am
IMO - B

The argument states...
Most of them hold political views that are less insightful than those of any reasonably well-educated person who is not an artist.

So from this we can infer that there can be a well-educated artist.

I was torn between B & E. If most artists have less insightful views than well-educated person who is not a artist, then there can exists artists who have no less insightful views as well-educated but not artists. However B sounds a better choice as "Some" is not a logical opposite of "Most"

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 64
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:53 am
Thanked: 2 times

by jan08 » Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:59 pm
OA please?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 195
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:33 am
Thanked: 10 times

by sankruth » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:05 pm
Can someone please explain why E?

Is "Most" the same as "Not all" and hence "Some" can be considered as "NOT Most"?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:10 pm
Thanked: 15 times

by sibbineni » Tue Jan 22, 2008 2:53 am
Can somebody please explain the answer?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:26 am

by khanshainur » Tue May 10, 2016 2:57 am
i think answer is D better