PrepTest 35, Section 3, Question 25
Zachary: The term "fresco" refers to paint that has been applied to wet plaster. Once dried, a fresco indelibly preserves the paint that a painter has applied in this way. Unfortunately, additions known to have been made by later painters have obscured the original fresco work done by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. Therefore, in order to restore Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel paintings to the appearance that Michelangelo intended them to have, everything except the original fresco work must be stripped away.
Zachary: The term "fresco" refers to paint that has been applied to wet plaster. Once dried, a fresco indelibly preserves the paint that a painter has applied in this way. Unfortunately, additions known to have been made by later painters have obscured the original fresco work done by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. Therefore, in order to restore Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel paintings to the appearance that Michelangelo intended them to have, everything except the original fresco work must be stripped away.
Stephen: But it was extremely common for painters of Michelangelo's era to add painted details to their own fresco work after the frescos had dried.
Zachary: The term "fresco" refers to paint that has been applied to wet plaster. Once dried, a fresco indelibly preserves the paint that a painter has applied in this way. Unfortunately, additions known to have been made by later painters have obscured the original fresco work done by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. Therefore, in order to restore Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel paintings to the appearance that Michelangelo intended them to have, everything except the original fresco work must be stripped away.
Stephen: But it was extremely common for painters of Michelangelo's era to add painted details to their own fresco work after the frescos had dried.
Zachary: The term "fresco" refers to paint that has been applied to wet plaster. Once dried, a fresco indelibly preserves the paint that a painter has applied in this way. Unfortunately, additions known to have been made by later painters have obscured the original fresco work done by Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel. Therefore, in order to restore Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel paintings to the appearance that Michelangelo intended them to have, everything except the original fresco work must be stripped away.
Stephen's response to Zachary proceeds by
calling into question an assumption on which Zachary's conclusion depends
challenging the definition of a key term in Zachary's argument
drawing a conclusion other than the one that Zachary reaches
denying the truth of one of the stated premises of Zachary's argument
demonstrating that Zachary's conclusion is not consistent with the premises he uses to support it
Explanations
Zachary and Stephen appear to disagree about whether or not post-dried additions to frescoes constitute the original artist's intentions.
Zachary suggests almost certainly not, whereas Stephen suggests likely yes. How do we know?
Zachary claims that we must remove every post-dried addition to Michelangelo's frescoes to restore them to Michelangelo's intended appearance. That means Zachary thinks Michelangelo wouldn't have intended these additions.
Stephen says post-dried additions were extremely common during the time, implying that we wouldn't necessarily have to remove the additions from Michelangelo's work to realize Michelangelo's artistic intent.
Turns out to be a Reasoning question—specifically regarding how Stephen responds to Zachary.
I want something like, "challenges an assumption underlying Zachary's argument," which would be that Michelangelo didn't intend for additions to be made to his work, unlike what commonly happened to his contemporaries.
Let's see.
Yes! Right off the bat, too. This is the answer. Stephen responds to Zachary by implying that, because it was common during Michelangelo's time to alter frescoes after they'd dried, we can't be sure the additions weren't part of Michelangelo's artistic intent.
No chance. Where does Stephen mince words with Zachary over a working definition? He doesn't, so this can't be correct.
Nah. Stephen doesn't actually make an explicit conclusion. He implicitly challenges an assumption in Zachary's argument.
Nope, but I could see this being a commonly picked wrong answer. Stephen doesn't call out a premise, but a requirement of Zachary's conclusion. Know your argument parts!
Also wrong. Stephen isn't saying Zachary can't be correct, just that Zachary's conclusion rests on potentially faulty assumptions.
0 Comments