PT152.S1.Q24 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 4 · lr

The author concludes that appearance alone does not entirely determine whether or not something is considered a work of art. This is supported by the example of Warhol’s Brillo Boxes. This artwork is visually indistinguishable from product packaging, but Brillo Boxes is considered a work of art, while the product packaging would not be considered a work of art.

The author supports a conclusion using an example.

The author doesn’t present something that’s believed to be art vs. something that’s actually art. Brillo Boxes are considered art. Product packaging isn’t considered art. Neither actually “is” art — we’re told what people consider or don’t consider to be art.

There is no opposing argument. An argument requires a premise and a conclusion. Although the author counters the view that appearance alone determines whether something’s considered art, that view isn’t an argument.

The author doesn’t say that Brillo Boxes and the product packaging are the same type of thing. They are visually indistinguishable, but that doesn’t mean they’re both art or that they’re both not art. The point is whether something’s considered art involves more than appearance.

If you consider “appearance alone determines whether something’s considered art” to be a theory, (D) is wrong because the author doesn’t question the assumptions underlying this. The author simply shows that it is false by pointing to a counterexample.

Something that would be impossible (only Brillo Boxes is considered art even though identical packaging looks the same) if a particular thesis were correct (appearance alone determines whether something’s considered art) is actually true (only Brillo Boxes is considered art).

PrepTest 152 - Section 1 - Question 24

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action