PrepTest 146, Section 2, Question 12
A 1955 analysis of paint samples from an(51 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(13 more words not shown)
- AThe 2009 analysis(22 more words not shown)
- BThe 2009 analysis(21 more words not shown)
- CThe 2009 analysis(16 more words not shown)
- DMany experts, based(17 more words not shown)
- ENew information that(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The cobalt is there in both analyses. Why does one analysis place the painting after 1804 while the other allows an earlier date?
We might wonder whether the history of cobalt blue needs revising. But the question gives us its absence from Europe before 1804 as part of the facts. There's another way to keep those facts intact: the paint containing cobalt might not belong to the original painting.
What we’re looking for
Imagine an artist painting the picture in the 1700s, followed by someone repairing damage with cobalt blue in 1810. A sample could contain the later pigment even though the picture itself is older. That's the distinction I'd look for in an answer resolving the discrepancy: a later touch-up rather than a later original.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
The cobalt is confined to the topmost layer, which might have been added to cover damage to the original paint. That gives the later analysis a reason to distinguish the age of the cobalt-containing layer from the age of the original work. The earlier analysis could detect cobalt without recognizing that it came from a repair. A doesn't prove a repair occurred, but it explains why the new findings permit the painting to be older than 1804.
- B
Both analyses already found cobalt. Being able to detect smaller amounts doesn't explain how cobalt could be present in a painting that might predate its European use. We need information about what the detected pigment tells us about the painting's age, not merely a better detector.
- C
More samples might make an analysis more comprehensive, but their number and size don't tell us why the conclusion about age changed. Were the samples from later paint, for example? C doesn't say. It leaves the connection between cobalt and the original painting unresolved.
- D
The experts' dating supplies another reason to think the painting is old. It doesn't explain why cobalt is present if that date is right. Calling the style consistent with the 1700s leaves us with the same apparent conflict between the early date and the later pigment.
- E
Rare use after 1804 is still use after 1804. This doesn't move the pigment's arrival earlier or explain how later paint could appear on an earlier work. It therefore doesn't reconcile the two analyses.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.