Self-study
Not all works of art represent something, but some do, and Support their doing so is relevant to our aesthetic experience of them; Support representation is therefore an aesthetically relevant property. ███████ █ ████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ ████████ ██ █████████ ████ ████████ ███ █████ ███ ██ █████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ███████ █████████████████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ███ ███████████ ███████ ██ ██████ █████████ ██ ████
Summarize Argument
Our argument concludes that there are no guidelines for defining objects as art. It supports that conclusion by identifying an attribute called representation, which is present in some art and dependent upon the art’s context. The argument then says there are no guidelines for determining aspects of art that rely on context (including representation), which the argument then stretches into the conclusion that there are no guidelines for defining art.
Identify and Describe Flaw
What if determining whether or not an object has representation is not the only way to identify it as art? Our author never defined representation as a necessary aspect for art; in fact, they told us that only some art has it. They failed to exclude the possibility that other attributes are sufficient for calling something art.
18.
The reasoning above is questionable ███████ ██ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ███████████ ████
a
because some works ██ ███ ███ ████████████████████ █████ ██ ██ ███ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ ████
Our conclusion depends on characteristics and relationships associated with representational art; because this answer choice deals with nonrepresentational art, it goes outside the scope of our argument and does not correctly identify a flaw.
b
an object may ████ ████ █████████ ██████████ ███ ███ ██ █ ████ ██ ███
Irrelevant. This answer choice goes outside the scope of our argument—we’re dealing with one specific aesthetic property and things that are art, not with other properties or non-art things.
c
aesthetically relevant properties █████ ████ ██████████████ ███ █████████ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ █ ████ ██ ███
This addresses our argument’s underlying assumption. If aesthetically relevant properties other than representation can qualify something as art, our author’s argument is moot.
d
some works of ███ ███ ████ ██████████ ████ ███ ███ ████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ ████
Even if this were true, it would not damage our argument. The author is focused on aesthetically relevant properties, not on aesthetically irrelevant ones.
e
some objects that █████████ ██████ █████ ████ ██████████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ███
Even if this was true, it would not harm the author’s argument because the author’s argument applies to art, not non-art objects. Moreover, the author never said or implied that for something to be representative, it has to be art.