- Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:00 am
#36482
Complete Question Explanation
Strengthen—PR. The correct answer choice is (E)
The principle presented here is this: if an inaccurate art auction house catalogue description is
a deliberate attempt to deceive bidders, then that auction house is guilty of misrepresentation—
regardless of whether the catalogue specifies that all descriptions within the publication are merely
opinion.
The application of this principle, as presented in the stimulus, is as follows: Healy’s art auction
house inaccurately described in its catalogue a modern reproduction vase as having been made in
the mid-eighteenth century. If the inaccurate description represents a deliberate attempt to mislead
buyers, then Healy’s, the author provides, is guilty of misrepresentation—even though its catalogue
specifies that all of its descriptions are opinion.
The question stem asks for the choice that ‘most justifies’ (or, strengthens) the application of the
principle (finding Healy’s to be guilty of misrepresentation), so the correct answer choice will
somehow show that Healy’s catalogue descriptions must have been deliberate attempts to mislead its
buyers.
Answer choice (A): This is a very clever and appealing wrong answer choice, because it provides
evidence that would provide motive for such deception. Although this choice does point to a
very clear benefit associated with Healy’s inaccurate description of the vase, this answer fails to
specifically strengthen the claim that Healy’s auction house was deliberately attempting to mislead
its buyers.
Answer choice (B): In the determination of Healy’s guilt based upon the principle in the stimulus,
the relevant question is whether Healy’s had intended to deceive its buyers when inaccurately
describing the vase. This intent is all that matters to this question’s analysis, and the question
of whether or not experts, or anyone else, chose to bid on the vase is irrelevant to the issue of
misrepresentation.
Answer choice (C): If the stated policy of the auction house is to avoid the mention of age, then
when they printed the catalogue, Healy’s went against stated policy by referencing the age of the
vase in question. This does not prove, however, that the auction house was deliberately attempting
to mislead its buyers, and thus does not strengthen the case for misrepresentation according to the
principle in the stimulus.
Answer choice (D): As discussed previously, the term “some” is quite vague; it means “at least one.”
So, this choice provides that there is at least one Healy’s employee who thinks that the auction house
should have an expert certification policy. The opinion that such a policy should be implemented
does not bolster the claim that Healy’s knowingly attempted to deceive its buyers, though, so it does
not help justify the claim that the auction house was guilty of misrepresentation when inaccurately
describing the vase.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice, which provides that without any basis for
the eighteenth-century attribution of the vase, the auction house described it as such in order to
increase the auction price. This is clear evidence of Healy’s intention to mislead buyers so that they
might bid more.
Strengthen—PR. The correct answer choice is (E)
The principle presented here is this: if an inaccurate art auction house catalogue description is
a deliberate attempt to deceive bidders, then that auction house is guilty of misrepresentation—
regardless of whether the catalogue specifies that all descriptions within the publication are merely
opinion.
The application of this principle, as presented in the stimulus, is as follows: Healy’s art auction
house inaccurately described in its catalogue a modern reproduction vase as having been made in
the mid-eighteenth century. If the inaccurate description represents a deliberate attempt to mislead
buyers, then Healy’s, the author provides, is guilty of misrepresentation—even though its catalogue
specifies that all of its descriptions are opinion.
The question stem asks for the choice that ‘most justifies’ (or, strengthens) the application of the
principle (finding Healy’s to be guilty of misrepresentation), so the correct answer choice will
somehow show that Healy’s catalogue descriptions must have been deliberate attempts to mislead its
buyers.
Answer choice (A): This is a very clever and appealing wrong answer choice, because it provides
evidence that would provide motive for such deception. Although this choice does point to a
very clear benefit associated with Healy’s inaccurate description of the vase, this answer fails to
specifically strengthen the claim that Healy’s auction house was deliberately attempting to mislead
its buyers.
Answer choice (B): In the determination of Healy’s guilt based upon the principle in the stimulus,
the relevant question is whether Healy’s had intended to deceive its buyers when inaccurately
describing the vase. This intent is all that matters to this question’s analysis, and the question
of whether or not experts, or anyone else, chose to bid on the vase is irrelevant to the issue of
misrepresentation.
Answer choice (C): If the stated policy of the auction house is to avoid the mention of age, then
when they printed the catalogue, Healy’s went against stated policy by referencing the age of the
vase in question. This does not prove, however, that the auction house was deliberately attempting
to mislead its buyers, and thus does not strengthen the case for misrepresentation according to the
principle in the stimulus.
Answer choice (D): As discussed previously, the term “some” is quite vague; it means “at least one.”
So, this choice provides that there is at least one Healy’s employee who thinks that the auction house
should have an expert certification policy. The opinion that such a policy should be implemented
does not bolster the claim that Healy’s knowingly attempted to deceive its buyers, though, so it does
not help justify the claim that the auction house was guilty of misrepresentation when inaccurately
describing the vase.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice, which provides that without any basis for
the eighteenth-century attribution of the vase, the auction house described it as such in order to
increase the auction price. This is clear evidence of Healy’s intention to mislead buyers so that they
might bid more.