If the recording now playing on the jazz program is really "Louis Armstrong recorded in concert in 1989," as the announcer said, then Louis Armstrong was playing some of the best jazz of his career years after his death. Since the trumpeter was definitely Louis Armstrong, somehow the announcer must have gotten the date of the recording wrong.
The patter of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following arguments?
(A) The museum is reported as having acquired a painting "by Malvina Hoffman, an artist who died in 1966." But Hoffman was sculptor, not a painter, so the report must be wrong about the acquisition being a painting.
(B) This painting titled La Toilette is Berthe Morisot's La Toilette only if a painting can be in two museums at the same time. Since nothing can be in two places at once, this painting must somehow have been mistitled.
(C) Only if a twentieth-century Mexican artist painted in Japan during the seventeenth century can this work both be "by Frida Kahlo" as labeled and the seventeenth century Japanese landscape it appears to be. Since it is what it appears to be, the label is wrong.
(D) Unless Kathe Kollwitz was both a sculptor and a printmaker, the volunteer museum guide is wrong in his attribution of this sculpture. Since what Kollwitz is known for is her prints, the guide must be wrong.
(E) If this painting is a portrait done in acrylic, it cannot be by Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun, since acrylic paint was developed only after her death. Thus, since it is definitely a portrait, the paint must not be acrylic.
The patter of reasoning in the argument above is most similar to that in which one of the following arguments?
(A) The museum is reported as having acquired a painting "by Malvina Hoffman, an artist who died in 1966." But Hoffman was sculptor, not a painter, so the report must be wrong about the acquisition being a painting.
(B) This painting titled La Toilette is Berthe Morisot's La Toilette only if a painting can be in two museums at the same time. Since nothing can be in two places at once, this painting must somehow have been mistitled.
(C) Only if a twentieth-century Mexican artist painted in Japan during the seventeenth century can this work both be "by Frida Kahlo" as labeled and the seventeenth century Japanese landscape it appears to be. Since it is what it appears to be, the label is wrong.
(D) Unless Kathe Kollwitz was both a sculptor and a printmaker, the volunteer museum guide is wrong in his attribution of this sculpture. Since what Kollwitz is known for is her prints, the guide must be wrong.
(E) If this painting is a portrait done in acrylic, it cannot be by Elisabeth Vigee-Lebrun, since acrylic paint was developed only after her death. Thus, since it is definitely a portrait, the paint must not be acrylic.
