Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorEvaluating Intermediate Conclusions

Art Historian: The recently discovered portrait *Lady in Blue* was painted by either Verrocchio or one of his apprentices. The painting utilizes a unique lapis lazuli pigment that was prohibitively expensive during the 1470s. Guild records show that only Verrocchio's primary workshop, not the satellite studios run by his apprentices, purchased this specific pigment during that decade. Therefore, the *Lady in Blue* must be the work of Verrocchio himself. Thus, the current owners of the painting should have it insured for a value commensurate with a verified Verrocchio masterwork.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the art historian's argument by the claim that the *Lady in Blue* must be the work of Verrocchio himself?

  1. It is an intermediate conclusion that is supported by the evidence regarding pigment purchases and that in turn supports the argument's final recommendation regarding insurance.Cevap
  2. B
    It is the argument's overall main conclusion, and the claim that the painting should be insured for a commensurate value is offered as a premise in support of it.
  3. C
    It is a foundational premise that provides historical context for the argument but receives no direct logical support from the other statements provided.
  4. D
    It is an inference that relies on introducing outside information about the historical valuation of Verrocchio's masterworks.
  5. E
    It is a flawed claim that the art historian attempts to justify by equivocating on the meaning of the term 'workshop.'

Cevap

The statement functions as an intermediate (or subsidiary) conclusion. It is logically supported by the premises about the lapis lazuli pigment and the guild records, and it simultaneously serves to support the argument's final conclusion regarding insurance.
The correct answer accurately identifies the target statement as an intermediate conclusion. It receives logical support from the preceding premises regarding the identity of the painter, the type of pigment used, and the guild records. In turn, it provides the necessary logical foundation for the argument's final recommendation—that the painting should be insured as a Verrocchio masterwork.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The final sentence, 'Thus, the current owners of the painting should have it insured for a value commensurate with a verified Verrocchio masterwork,' is the main conclusion.
This is the ultimate recommendation the art historian is attempting to prove, and it receives support from the rest of the text while supporting nothing else.
2
Analyze the structural role of the target statement.
The target statement, 'the Lady in Blue must be the work of Verrocchio himself,' is introduced by the indicator word 'Therefore', signaling it is a conclusion.
Structural indicators help map the logical flow, but the precise type of conclusion must be determined by its relationship to the rest of the argument.
3
Determine the relationship between the target statement, the premises, and the main conclusion.
The target statement is proven by the first three sentences (the premises about the expensive pigment and guild purchases). It is then used as a stepping stone to prove the final sentence (the insurance recommendation).
A statement that is supported by premises and in turn acts as a premise to support the main conclusion is classified as an intermediate conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions

Bu konudan daha fazla soru