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

Redeem

MGMAT ASSUMPTION PROBLEM

Expert replies
by nandy1984 » Sun Apr 08, 2012 4:05 am
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?
a) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
b) Michelangelo did not work on the painting over the course of several years.
c) The coin depicted in the painting was known to general public in 1507.
d) The wooden panel on which the painting was executed cannot be tested accurately for age.
e) Michelangelo's painting style did not change between 1507 and 1509.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by ranjeet75 » Sun Apr 08, 2012 7:09 am
IMO B

Because if Michelangelo worked on any painting for 3 - years then it is possible that it started in 1506 with the earlier paint and ended with new paint in 1511
Join the discussion

by ice_rush » Sun Apr 08, 2012 7:11 am
IMO B.
Join the discussion

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Sun Apr 08, 2012 7:18 am
A--irrelevant to whether Michelangelo would have used them
B--works. If he DID work on it over several years, then both premises are still true, but the conclusion about when the painting was completed is no longer supported.
C--fits the timeline, but not required for the argument to be true
D--the age of the panel is irrelevant
E--painting style is irrelevant
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
Join the discussion

by nandy1984 » Sun Apr 08, 2012 8:43 am
Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:A--irrelevant to whether Michelangelo would have used them
B--works. If he DID work on it over several years, then both premises are still true, but the conclusion about when the painting was completed is no longer supported.
C--fits the timeline, but not required for the argument to be true
D--the age of the panel is irrelevant
E--painting style is irrelevant
How can we say this "but the conclusion about when the painting was completed is no longer supported"

From the argument we say painting started at Jan2nd 1507 and ended on Dec 31 1508... here we say more than 1.5yrs so we can use several years....
Join the discussion

by patanjali.purpose » Sun Apr 08, 2012 1:36 pm
nandy1984 wrote:
Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:A--irrelevant to whether Michelangelo would have used them
B--works. If he DID work on it over several years, then both premises are still true, but the conclusion about when the painting was completed is no longer supported.
C--fits the timeline, but not required for the argument to be true
D--the age of the panel is irrelevant
E--painting style is irrelevant
How can we say this "but the conclusion about when the painting was completed is no longer supported"

From the argument we say painting started at Jan2nd 1507 and ended on Dec 31 1508... here we say more than 1.5yrs so we can use several years....

Answer lies in the first sentence:
A newly discovered painting on wooden panel by Michelangelo must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509.
AFTER 1507 BUT BEFORE 1509. This means 1507 < PAINTING < 1509. This means, painting painted in 1508

Furthermore,
a) No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
- I do not think we say that since the stocks were available, painters would have used the stocks!
Join the discussion

by GmatKiss » Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:07 pm
Comes down to A/B

IMO: B
Join the discussion

by agarwalva » Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:42 pm
Join the discussion