Self-study
Support In determining the authenticity of a painting, connoisseurs claim to be guided by the emotional impact the work has on them. ███ ████████ ██ █ ████████ ███████████ ██ █████████ ██ ██████████ ███ ███████████ ██████ ██ █ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ ████████ ███ ███ ██ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ██ █████████ ██████ ███████ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ █ █████████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ █████████
Summarize Argument
The author says we cannot rely on art connoisseurs’ assessments of whether paintings are authentic. He explains this by stating that connoisseurs use a painting’s emotional impact to determine authenticity. However, because the way a painting emotionally impacts people can be very different from person to person, the author claims this method of determining authenticity must not work.
Identify and Describe Flaw
Our author is very general in describing how the emotional impact of a painting can vary widely from person to person; however, he is very specific in his conclusion about art connoisseurs. What if art connoisseurs all have the same emotional reaction to a certain artwork because of the education or experience that makes them connoisseurs? Art connoisseurs could be an exception to our author’s generalization about all people’s reactions to art.
16.
The reasoning in the argument ██ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ████████
a
ignores the fact ████ ████████ ███ ████ █ ████████████ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ █ ████████
Our author does not ignore this; they address it in their premise. Our argument’s flaw hinges on the differentiation between how connoisseurs and laypeople emotionally experience a work of art, not just that laypeople can assess those emotions.
b
is based on ███ █████████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████ ███ █████████ ██████ ████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ █████████ ██ ███████
Our author uses Rembrandt as an example to illustrate their point, but does not use this example as the sole support for their argument like this answer choice suggests. This misses the mark of how connoisseurs differ in emotional reactions to everyone else.
c
neglects the possibility ████ █████ ███ ██ ██████████ █████████ █████ ████████████ █████ █████████ ██████ ████ ████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ██████
Our author never confirms that connoisseurs differ in emotional reactions the same way as everyone else, and this answer choice highlights that flaw. If most connoisseurs experience the same emotions when looking at the same painting, our author’s argument would be unsupported.
d
presumes, without giving ██████████████ ████ █ ██████████ █████████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ████████████
The author does not mistakenly assume this. Rather, this point is their conclusion, and they do provide justification for it. However, their justification, or the support for this conclusion, is flawed; therefore, this is not the author’s flaw.
e
presumes, without offering █████████ ████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ █████████ ████████ ██ ████████ ████ ████ █████ ████████
Our author never assumes this. They use Rembrandt as an example to help illustrate their point, but they never compare Rembrandt to any other painter.