Some twentieth-century art is great art. All great art involves original ideas, and any art that is not influential ...
MazenFebruary 27, 2020
Please Help: Eliminated A for the wrong reason
Hello,
I eliminated A, because I saw it as "could be true." However, based on the message-threads I read, It seems that A should be eliminated because it "must be true."
I understand that we can deduce a quantifiable overlap between two necessary variables that are triggered by a common sufficient variable. However, that overlap via the "some" is only valid when their common sufficient variable is in existence. Here is where I need your help. How can it be "must be true" rather than "could be true" when we don't know that the common sufficient variable exists????
Please help
Thank you
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
First, remember that follows logically means "must be true." Because this is a bizarro question, we are eliminating the answers that must be true. An answer that only "could be true" would be the correct answer in this case.
The previous threads that you read were correct. A must be true. I am assuming that the sufficient condition you mentioned is "great art." If it is great, then it must involve original ideas and be influential.
G - - - - - - > OI and I
How do we know that great art exists? Because of the first sentence! Some twentieth-century art is great. Therefore, we know that some art is influential and involves original ideas.
MazenMarch 1, 2020
Thank you for reminding me that "follows logically" means "must be true," and for showing me where the existence of great art is established.
