Reviewer: The book Art’s Decline argues that European painters today lack skills that were common among European painters of preceding centuries. In this the book must be right, since its analysis of 100 paintings, 50 old and 50 contemporary, demonstrates convincingly that none of the contemporary paintings are executed as skillfully as the older paintings.
Which of the following points to the most serious logical flaw in the reviewer's argument?
(A) The paintings chosen by the book's author for analysis could be those that most support the book's thesis.
(B) There could be criteria other than the technical skill of the artist by which to evaluate a painting.
(C) The title of the book could cause readers to accept the book's thesis even before they read the analysis of the paintings that supports it.
(D) The particular methods currently used by European painters could require less artistic skill than do methods used by painters in other parts of the world.
(E) A reader who was not familiar with the language of art criticism might not be convinced by the book's analysis of the 100 paintings.
OA is A
Please explain.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Art's Decline
This topic has expert replies
-
fighting_cax
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Philippines
- Thanked: 3 times
-
mehravikas
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1161
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Thanked: 23 times
- Followed by:1 members
I almost got the correct answer, my two serious contenders were A and B.
A - talks about that book is to prove that new art has declined so the contemporary paintings used as examples in the book must be supporting book's thesis i.e. to prove that new art has declined.
B - There could be other ways to analyze the painters other than skill used in this book
I chose B...got it wrong.
A - talks about that book is to prove that new art has declined so the contemporary paintings used as examples in the book must be supporting book's thesis i.e. to prove that new art has declined.
B - There could be other ways to analyze the painters other than skill used in this book
I chose B...got it wrong.
fighting_cax wrote:Reviewer: The book Art’s Decline argues that European painters today lack skills that were common among European painters of preceding centuries. In this the book must be right, since its analysis of 100 paintings, 50 old and 50 contemporary, demonstrates convincingly that none of the contemporary paintings are executed as skillfully as the older paintings.
Which of the following points to the most serious logical flaw in the reviewer's argument?
(A) The paintings chosen by the book's author for analysis could be those that most support the book's thesis.
(B) There could be criteria other than the technical skill of the artist by which to evaluate a painting.
(C) The title of the book could cause readers to accept the book's thesis even before they read the analysis of the paintings that supports it.
(D) The particular methods currently used by European painters could require less artistic skill than do methods used by painters in other parts of the world.
(E) A reader who was not familiar with the language of art criticism might not be convinced by the book's analysis of the 100 paintings.
OA is A
Please explain.
-
shibal
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 345
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 6:53 pm
- Location: Sao Paulo-Brazil
- Thanked: 12 times
- GMAT Score:660
definitely A.
since the statement says that 100 paintings were chosen, it gives us a tip that we can trace down 'statistics' mismatches.
the conclusion basically says that contemporary painters suxs, when comparing to old painters. the argument is based when it gets 50 paintings from each time period....
however, if the author chose the paintings for an analysis that could support the book's thesis, the conclusion that contemporary painters suxs isn't valid.... weakening the argument... hope it helps....
since the statement says that 100 paintings were chosen, it gives us a tip that we can trace down 'statistics' mismatches.
the conclusion basically says that contemporary painters suxs, when comparing to old painters. the argument is based when it gets 50 paintings from each time period....
however, if the author chose the paintings for an analysis that could support the book's thesis, the conclusion that contemporary painters suxs isn't valid.... weakening the argument... hope it helps....
-
fighting_cax
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Philippines
- Thanked: 3 times
B is not correct coz it has unnecessarily mentioned the technical skills, but in the stimuli "skills" is mentioned. also in the stimuli, the criteria for evaluation is never discussed, so this would be a weak contender.fighting_cax wrote:Why can't choice B be the answer?
-
ashley.com
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 4:32 am
-
alanforde800Maximus
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 187
- Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 12:46 am
