PrepTest 102, Section 4, Question 9
The Board of Trustees of the Federici Art(92 more words not shown)
The conclusion drawn depends on(6 more words not shown)
- AArt speculators are(13 more words not shown)
- BAll of the(16 more words not shown)
- CAll of the(19 more words not shown)
- DOnly an avid(19 more words not shown)
- EA great work(18 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
An early painting might be unimpressive on its own and still be useful in a museum.
Imagine an exhibit showing an artist's development. An awkward early work could help visitors see what changed before the artist produced a masterpiece. Losing it might diminish that story even if nobody regards the individual painting as especially accomplished.
That is my first concern about the curator's reasoning. The museum needs money to refurbish its galleries, and selling paintings would raise funds. But why does an inferior painting necessarily add nothing to the collection? The quality of one work and its contribution to a collection might be different questions.
What we’re looking for
The stem asks for an assumption on which the conclusion depends. We need something the reasoning requires, not just an interesting fact about art. My initial concern is about whether selling the early works really leaves the collection's quality intact. I'll keep that conclusion in view as I read the choices: the board's sale supposedly won't detract from the collection.
Working the answers
- A
The argument doesn't require buyers to confuse a weak painting with a masterpiece. Someone might recognize an early work's limitations and still buy it at an appropriate price. The conclusion concerns the quality of the collection left behind, not whether the museum can fool buyers into overpaying.
- BCorrect
This identifies a different gap from the one I first noticed. The curator recommends selling certain paintings; the board has decided to sell some works. Have we been told the board will stick to that recommended group?
What if the board sells a masterpiece instead? The curator's judgment that the immature works add nothing would no longer support the conclusion about the actual sale. The argument needs the sale to stay within the works that its stated reason treats as dispensable. B supplies that connection. It doesn't answer every possible concern about the curator's judgment, but it is needed for this reasoning to apply to what the board does.
- C
It doesn't matter whether Ms. Federici bought every Renoir and Cézanne the museum owns. The museum could have received other paintings from another donor. We still need to know which works will be sold and why losing them wouldn't reduce the collection's quality. Ownership history doesn't supply that connection.
- D
The argument doesn't require a particular kind of buyer to pay a high price. The paintings could sell to other buyers at lower prices, and the question of their contribution to the collection would remain. We aren't trying to prove that the museum will receive an exceptionally large payment for each work.
- E
This could explain why maintaining galleries matters to appreciating art. It doesn't show that selling these works leaves the collection's quality intact, and the argument doesn't require the absolute rule that great art can be appreciated only in carefully designed, well-maintained spaces. A reason to improve the building is different from a reason the sale won't diminish the collection.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.