BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Michelangelo

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 12 times

Michelangelo

by piyush_nitt » Thu May 07, 2009 10:48 pm
A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.
The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.
The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.
Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.


OA : B
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 876
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:14 am
Thanked: 13 times

by ketkoag » Thu May 07, 2009 11:34 pm
I am not sure but lemme break it this way.
conclusion: painting completed between 1507 and 1509.

reasoning: contains coin that was not minted until 1507 and a pigment is used in it that was abandoned by him in 1509.

I don't think that the reasoning led us to the conclusion that the painting is completed between 1507 and 1509.

It might be possible that the coin and the pigment has been used between the two year but rest of the painting could be completed after or before that period. So we need an answer that proves that the painting was completed between 1507 and 1509.

Now by POE we can get the answer, but still i need experts to show how B is an assumption to this question.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 9:32 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:1 members

Re: Michelangelo

by kanha81 » Fri May 08, 2009 9:35 am
piyush_nitt wrote:A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509. It cannot have been painted earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year. It cannot have been painted after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.
The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.
The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.
Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.


OA : B
I am no expert, but I was able to narrow down answer choices to [spoiler][A][/spoiler] & [spoiler][/spoiler]

[C]- Talks about coin and not pigment.
[D]- Negate this one. It neither strengthens or weakens
[E]- Irrelevant. We're not discussing about Michel's painting style

Now, [spoiler][A][/spoiler]- Negate- Some stocks of abandoned pigment existed after 1509. OK, so how does this affect the argument? It simply does not because well, although the abandoned pigment could have existed, it will could have been used by some other painters. Again speculation!

[spoiler][/spoiler]- From the data, we certainly know that Michelangelo covered painting from 1507 to 1509. Negate- Michelangelo worked on the painting over the course of several years. Well, this weakens the conclusion and it falls apart from the facts. Hence [spoiler][/spoiler]
Want to Beat GMAT.
Always do what you're afraid to do. Whoooop GMAT
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:56 pm
Thanked: 104 times
Followed by:1 members

by scoobydooby » Fri May 08, 2009 10:06 pm
stimulus: painting completed after 1507 but before 1509=> painting must have been done in 1508

B: if negated-painting done over a span of several years-argument that it was done in one year (1508) falls apart.

the rest of the choices do not affect the conclusion
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:14 am

by Brad.C » Sun May 15, 2016 1:48 pm
I agree with OA
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:03 am

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 1:50 pm
I still feel B should be the answer
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1