PrepTest 122

Incorrect. The argument is about why a material is chosen, not the reasoning behind the effect of that material, so this answer is out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Phenomenon - Modern sculpture is monochromatic
Explanation - A misunderstanding
What's that misunderstanding? - When exhumed, ancient sculptures were unpainted, and people (wrongly) believed that they'd always been unpainted

Answer Anticipation:
This argument establishes the reason for a phenomenon—monochromatic modern sculptures are based on a misunderstanding of what ancient sculptures looked like.

Why does it believe this to be true? Because people believed (wrongly) that ancient sculptures were unpainted, and modern sculptures are also unpainted. From this, it concludes that the belief about the ancient sculptures influenced what modern sculptors did.

However, there's no evidence that this belief was the cause! (Yes, this is a correlation/causation flaw.) It could be that modern sculptors don't paint their sculptures because they prefer the look, or because paint doesn't last as long as whatever they sculpt in and they don't want their work degrading over time. There are many different potential explanations for the modern phenomenon that isn't tied to the one from the past.

Since the argument assumes that the belief about ancient sculptures influenced what modern sculptors do, let's find an answer establishing that.

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects the belief about ancient sculpture to the decisions of modern sculptors—a connection required by the argument. If modern sculpture hasn't been influenced by these beliefs, then the author's conclusion falls apart.

Key Takeaway:
This argument tries to hide its causal nature, but, in the end, it features a correlation/causation flaw. A good way to see this in future questions that follow a similar pattern is to recognize that any explanation for a given phenomenon is inherently causal. When you can understand an argument through that lens, you're likely dealing with a causal conclusion, or a causal assumption.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't speak to the beliefs that form the core of the conclusion. It's also drawing a comparison that is irrelevant to the argument, since the argument is about beliefs influencing decisions instead of what's true of the materials.

Incorrect. Paintings in general are out of scope, including those of sculptures. And, if anything, ancient paintings of sculptures would have shown them painted, thus preventing a misunderstanding, so this answer choice isn't really aligned with the stimulus.

Incorrect. An argument stating that a misunderstanding led to a trend doesn't require that the trend will end when the misunderstanding is cleared up. It could be the case that the misunderstanding caused the trend, but then the trend took hold and nothing could stop it.