PrepTest 58, Section 2, Question 12
City councilperson: Many city residents oppose the city art commission's proposed purchase of an unusual stone edifice, on the grounds that art critics are divided over whether the edifice really qualifies as art. But I argue that the purpose of art is to cause experts to debate ideas, including ideas about what constitutes art itself. Since the edifice has caused experts to debate what constitutes art itself, it does qualify as art.
City councilperson: Many city residents oppose the city art commission's proposed purchase of an unusual stone edifice, on the grounds that art critics are divided over whether the edifice really qualifies as art. But I argue that the purpose of art is to cause experts to debate ideas, including ideas about what constitutes art itself. Since the edifice has caused experts to debate what constitutes art itself, it does qualify as art.
City councilperson: Many city residents oppose the city art commission's proposed purchase of an unusual stone edifice, on the grounds that art critics are divided over whether the edifice really qualifies as art. But I argue that the purpose of art is to cause experts to debate ideas, including ideas about what constitutes art itself. Since the edifice has caused experts to debate what constitutes art itself, it does qualify as art.
City councilperson: Many city residents oppose the city art commission's proposed purchase of an unusual stone edifice, on the grounds that art critics are divided over whether the edifice really qualifies as art. But I argue that the purpose of art is to cause experts to debate ideas, including ideas about what constitutes art itself. Since the edifice has caused experts to debate what constitutes art itself, it does qualify as art.
Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the conclusion of the city councilperson's argument to be properly inferred?
Nothing qualifies as art unless it causes debate among experts.
If an object causes debate among experts, no expert can be certain whether that object qualifies as art.
The purchase of an object that fulfills the purpose of art should not be opposed.
Any object that fulfills the purpose of art qualifies as art.
The city art commission should purchase the edifice if it qualifies as art.
Explanations
There's a subtle shift in terms in this argument. If you didn't catch it, I'm sure you struggled with this one.
The city councilperson starts off by discussing the purpose of art and then concludes the stone edifice is art because it fulfills the purpose of art.
It turns out to be a Sufficient Assumption question, so we need the answer choice that guarantees the stone edifice is art.
I want something like, "If you fulfill the purpose of art, then you're art." This would ensure that the stone edifice qualifies as art because it we're explicitly told it fulfills art's purpose.
Let's go find it.
Nah. This confuses sufficient and necessary. The passage doesn't insinuate that fulfilling art's purpose is necessary for being art, it suggests that fulfilling art's purpose is sufficient to qualify as art.
Nope. This is a devastating weakener. If this is true, then our edifice cannot be qualified as art.
No. This adds evidence to a different conclusion, one the city councilperson doesn't make explicitly. The councilperson argues the edifice is art, and would probably implicitly support its purchase, but they never actually argue that we should buy it.
Perfect. We can reword this answer choice, "If an object fulfills the purpose of art, then it qualifies as art." This is precisely what we predicted.
Nope. Like C, this answer choice adds evidence to an argument the city councilperson did not make.
0 Comments