A museum director, in order to

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Evidence Match10% picked this

   It concludes that a certain opinion is correct on the grounds that it is held by more people

   When an answer choice is structured like, concludes that X on the grounds that Y we can ask whether X matches the conclusion and Y matches the evidence. Does the author conclude that a certain opinion is correct? Sure, the intermediate conclusion (or whatever we're calling that tangled mess of opinion in the final sentence) is saying that the critics' evaluation was correct. Does the evidence say "there are more people who think they were first-rate pieces than people who think they weren't"? No. The evidence has nothing to do with counting up opinion votes on both sides of the issue -- the evidence is purely about how much the paintings sold for (these prices settle the issue).

   10%
2. B

   Opposite: rejects experts2% picked this

   It rejects the judgment of the experts in an area in which there is no better guide to

   The potential experts here would be the museum director and the art critics. The only plural experts would be the critics. Our author embraces the judgment of the critics, so it's not accurate to say he rejects the judgment of the experts.

   2%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion Match Never a Flaw4% picked this

   It rejects a proven means of accomplishing an objective without offering any alternative means of

   Does the author's conclusion reject a proven means of accomplishing an objective? No, so we can stop reading. Our conclusion is saying the critics were right to condemn the director's selling of these paintings, but were we ever told that "A proven means of raising money to finance new acquisitions is for a museum director to secretly sell off paintings from major artists that she considers inferior pieces"? Heavens no. Also, it's not actually a flaw to conclude "this plan / this action sucked" while not providing an alternative solution. The defense attorney can prove "my client didn't do it" without having to also solve the crime for the police and find the real killer.

   4%
4. D

   Bad Evidence/Conclusion Match9% picked this

   It bases a firm conclusion about a state of affairs in the present on somewhat speculative claims about

   When an answer choice is structured like, bases a conclusion about X on Y we can ask whether X matches the conclusion and Y matches the evidence. Does the author firmly conclude something about a present state of affairs? Not really. He is presently concluding that the critics were correct when they condemned the director for having sold the paintings. Seems like the conclusion is about a state of affairs in the past. Does the evidence discuss somewhat speculative claims about a future state of affairs? Not at all. It just discusses how much these paintings sold for when they were re-sold (in the past).

   9%
5. E

   Correct74% picked this

   It bases its conclusion on facts that could, in the given situation, have resulted from causes other than

   Why this is right

   Wow, what an unhelpful answer choice. This answer choice is basically a totally generic version of the famous Causal flaw. Causal flaws come in different forms (the most famous one being inferring a causal relationship from a mere correlation), but they share this commonality: - the author presents a Curious Fact - the author overconfidently concludes one possible explanation, even though other possible explanations exist That's all this is saying. The conclusion is based on the facts of the re-sale price being 2-3 times what the director received when she sold the paintings. The author presupposes that the cause of that elevated re-sale price is that these are first-rate pieces. However, the higher re-sale prices could have resulted from other causes, such as - they are inferior pieces, but the director sold them for less than she could have - they are inferior pieces, but someone stupidly overpaid for them when they were re-sold If you want to see another example of a Curious Fact argument on Flaw, where they don't really name the alternative cause, check this one out.

   Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   74%