VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
2flY wrote:
gmattokyo wrote:
I'll go with A
No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
- Michelangelo abandoned the pigment used to make the paint (not the paint) because cheaper version was available. There is no mention that he stopped using the existing stock. If he has spent a lot making a stock of paint, he'll use that
No stocks of the abandoned pigment existed after 1509.
- Michelangelo abandoned the pigment used to make the paint (not the paint) because cheaper version was available. There is no mention that he stopped using the existing stock. If he has spent a lot making a stock of paint, he'll use that
These were my thoughts. However, this seems to be wrong...
Yes, the reason this option is option (A) is that it is tempting to jump to it right away. But it is incorrect.
The problem here is that the option says 'No stocks existed after 1509'.
We don't need to assume that. Recall that the argument says that Michelangelo stopped using the pigment, not that the pigment was not manufactured after 1509. It is immaterial whether stock of the pigment existed after 1509. We know that Michelangelo abandoned the use of the pigment after 1509.
Look at the argument:
- The painting must have been completed after 1507 but before 1509.
- Not earlier than 1507 because one of its central figures carries a coin that was not minted until that year.
- Not after 1509 because it contains a pigment that Michelangelo is known to have abandoned when a cheaper alternative became available in 1509.
The argument clearly tells us that Michelangelo abandoned the use of the pigment in 1509. Whether he had stocks of it or not, he abandoned its use in 1509. The argument seems pretty good fit except for one thing - it says that the painting must have been COMPLETED within 1507 to 1509. That's the folly of the argument. Based on the premises, we can say for sure that he painted it during this time frame. We cannot say whether he completed it during this time.
He could have painted it over many years which would include the time frame of 1507 - 1509. When we say that he completed it before 1509, we are assuming that he did the painting in a matter of a few weeks or months, not over many years.
Hence your answer is (B)
I could not get why is B the answer...
Michelangelo could have started the painting in 1507, but completed the same b/w 1507 and 1509.
As you stated , "We cannot say whether he completed it during this time.
He could have painted it over many years which would include the time frame of 1507 - 1509. When we say that he completed it before 1509, we are assuming that he did the painting in a matter of a few weeks or months, not over many years. "
Maybe he did the majority of painting b/w 1500 to 1506..=> that can be considered...
and the remaining part of painting was completed b/w 1507 and 1509.
Several years of work on painting(1500-1506), still lies in the argument.
He just completed it b/w 1507 and 1509.