Futurist: Artists in the next century will be supported largely by private patrons. Because these patrons will almost invariably be supporters of the social order—whatever it happens to be at the time—art in the next century will rarely express social and political doctrines that are perceived to be subversive of that social order.
Summarize Argument
The futurist concludes that art in the next century won’t be subversive. This is because artists in the next century will be supported by private patrons who in turn support the status quo.
Notable Assumptions
The futurist assumes that patrons won’t fund art that they find disagreeable from a social or political standpoint.
A
Art patrons tend not to support artists whose art expresses social and political views that are in opposition to their own.
Patrons won’t fund artist who create subversive art. Hence why artists likely won’t be making subversive art in the future, where artists are supported by patrons.
B
Art patrons tend to be more interested in formal artistic problems than in the social and political issues of their time.
This weakens the futurist’s argument. If patrons mostly care about formal artistic problems, then they wouldn’t mind funding subversive artists.
C
Artists are as prone to attack the contemporary social and political order in their work as they are to defend it.
We don’t care about what artists do now. We care about what they’ll do in the future.
D
Artists tend to become more critical of contemporary social and political arrangements after they are freed of their dependency on private patrons.
We need to know that most artists aren’t critical at all of social and political arrangements when they have a patron. This only tells us artists get more critical once they’re independent from patrons.
E
Art patrons tend to oppose all social change except that initiated by artists.
This weakens the futurist’s argument. In the future, the futurist doesn’t think art patrons won’t be supporting social change at all. Hence why they won’t be supporting subversive artists.
University budget committee: Athletes experience fewer injuries on artificial-turf athletic fields than on natural-grass fields. Additionally, natural-grass fields are more expensive to maintain than fields made of artificial turf. Nevertheless, this committee recommends replacing the university’s current artificial-turf field with a natural-grass field.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why does the committee recommend replacing artificial-turf with natural-grass, even though fewer athletes are injured on artificial-turf, and artificial-turf is cheaper to maintain?
Objective
The correct answer should differentiate artificial-turf and natural-grass in a way that’s negative for artificial-turf or positive for natural-grass. The correct answer should relate to money and costs, because the recommendation is made by the budget committee.
A
The university’s current artificial-turf athletic field has required extensive maintenance since its original installation.
We already know that natural-grass is more expensive to maintain. So even if artificial-turf has required extensive maintenance, that requirement would continue, in a more costly way, with a natural-turf field.
B
Most injuries sustained on artificial-turf fields take longer to heal and require more expensive physical therapy than do injuries sustained on natural-grass fields.
This gives us something negative about artificial-turf fields compared to natural-grass fields. This helps explain why the budget committee might have recommended switching to natural-grass.
C
It is difficult for spectators at athletic events to determine whether an athletic field is artificial turf or natural grass.
This doesn’t differentiate between artificial-turf and natural-grass, and it doesn’t tell me something worse about artificial-turf compared to natural-grass.
D
Maintaining artificial-turf fields involves the occasional replacement of damaged sections of turf, whereas natural-grass fields require daily watering and periodic fertilization.
We already know that natural-grass fields are more expensive to maintain. This just gives us additional details on the extra maintenance required for natural-grass.
E
Athletes who have spent most of their playing time on natural-grass fields generally prefer not to play on artificial-turf fields.
It’s not clear that athlete preference is something that would motivate a recommendation of the budget committee. But even if it is, we have no reason to think athletes at the university have spent most of their time on natural-grass fields.