In the paintings by seventeenth-century Dutch artist Vermeer, we find several recurrent items: a satin jacket, a certain Turkish carpet, and wooden chairs with lion’s-head finials. These reappearing objects might seem to evince a dearth of props. Yet we know that many of the props Vermeer used were expensive. Thus, while we might speculate about exactly why Vermeer worked with a small number of familiar objects, it was clearly not for lack of props that the recurrent items were used.

Summary
The author concludes that the reason Vermeer used recurring items in his paintings is not because he lacked props. This is based on the fact that many of the recurring items in his paintings were expensive.

Missing Connection
All we know from the premise is that many recurring items in Vermeer’s paintings are expensive. But this doesn’t prove anything about the reason Vermeer used the recurring items as props. How can the author reach the conclusion that the reason is not because he lacked props? We want to get from the fact many props were expensive to the conclusion that the reason Vermeer used recurring items is not because he lacked props:
If he used many expensive props → lacking props is not the reason he used recurring props
OR
If lacking props IS the reason he used recurring props → he would NOT have used many expensive props

A
Vermeer often borrowed the expensive props he represented in his paintings.
The fact he borrowed the props doesn’t tell us anything about whether he lacked props or didn’t lack props.
B
The props that recur in Vermeer’s paintings were always available to him.
The constant availability of the props that he used doesn’t tell us anything about whether he lacked props or didn’t lack props. Maybe he had only a few props, and those props were always available to him.
C
The satin jacket and wooden chairs that recur in the paintings were owned by Vermeer’s sister.
Whether the props were owned by his sister doesn’t tell us anything about whether he lacked props or whether this lack of props is the reason he used recurring items in his paintings.
D
The several recurrent items that appeared in Vermeer’s paintings had special sentimental importance for him.
The fact some recurring items in his paintings had sentimental importance to him does not imply that the reason he used those recurring items had nothing to do with lacking props. It’s possible he did lack props and that this why he used the same items over and over.
E
If a dearth of props accounted for the recurrent objects in Vermeer’s paintings, we would not see expensive props in any of them.
“Dearth” means lack. (E) connects the premise to the conclusion. If a lack of props was the reason for the recurring items, we wouldn’t see expensive props in the paintings. But since we do see expensive props in the paintings, (E) establishes that a lack of props was NOT the reason for the recurring items.

35 comments

A 1991 calculation was made to determine what, if any, additional health-care costs beyond the ordinary are borne by society at large for people who live a sedentary life. The figure reached was a lifetime average of $1,650. Thus people’s voluntary choice not to exercise places a significant burden on society.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that people who choose not to exercise impose “significant” additional costs on society. Why? Because a calculation showed the average sedentary person contributes $1,650 in extra healthcare costs to society over their lifetime.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that a burden of $1,650 over each sedentary person’s lifetime adds up to a “significant” total. In addition, she assumes that people who live a sedentary life do so because they choose not to exercise.

A
Many people whose employment requires physical exertion do not choose to engage in regular physical exercise when they are not at work.
Such people may not be counted as sedentary. There’s no indication the 1991 calculation relied on an estimate of how many people live a sedentary lifestyle.
B
Exercise is a topic that is often omitted from discussion between doctor and patient during a patient’s visit.
Patients may still seek medical care for conditions caused by a sedentary lifestyle, even if that lifestyle is not identified as the cause. This helps explain why some people choose not to exercise, but doesn’t address any burden they might place on society.
C
Physical conditions that eventually require medical or nursing-home care often first predispose a person to adopt a sedentary life-style.
This implies those physical conditions are responsible for much of the healthcare burden, rather than voluntary decisions not to exercise. It challenges the author’s assumption that sedentary people simply choose to avoid exercise.
D
Individuals vary widely in the amount and kind of exercise they choose, when they do exercise regularly.
This refers to people who exercise regularly, not those with a sedentary lifestyle. It doesn’t say the collection of people with a sedentary lifestyle is ill-defined.
E
A regular program of moderate exercise tends to increase circulation, induce a feeling of well-being and energy, and decrease excess weight.
This offers more detail to the argument. These benefits of exercise help explain why a sedentary lifestyle is unhealthy—they don’t address the apparent burden people who don’t exercise place on society.

47 comments

It is clear that humans during the Upper Paleolithic period used lamps for light in caves. Though lamps can be dated to the entire Upper Paleolithic, the distribution of known lamps from the period is skewed, with the greatest number being associated with the late Upper Paleolithic period, when the Magdalenian culture was dominant.

"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why is the later portion of the Upper Paleolithic period, when the Magdalenian culture was dominant, associated with a much higher number of lamps than earlier in the Upper Paleolithic period?

Objective
This is an EXCEPT question. The four wrong answers should tells us about a difference between the late Upper Paleolithic and the earlier parts of the Upper Paleolithic that could lead to a greater number of lamps being associated with the late period.

A
Artifacts from early in the Upper Paleolithic period are harder to identify than those that originated later in the period.
This suggests we might be less able to identify artifacts from the earlier period as lamps, which could explain why the late period is associated with a greater number of lamps.
B
More archaeological sites have been discovered from the Magdalenian culture than from earlier cultures.
If we’ve found more sites from the Magdalenian culture than from earlier cultures, this suggests the greater number of lamps from the late Upper Paleolithic may be due to finding more sites (and hence, more artifacts) from this period than from earlier periods.
C
More efficient lamp-making techniques were developed by the Magdalenian culture than by earlier cultures.
If the Magdalenians had more efficient lamp-making techniques than earlier cultures, that suggests they could make more lamps within a given time, which could explain why the late Upper Paleolithic is associated with more lamps.
D
Fire pits were much more common in caves early in the Upper Paleolithic period than they were later in that period.
If fire pits were more common in the earlier Upper Paleolithic, that could suggest less of a need for lamps, which could explain why the earlier period is associated with fewer lamps than is the later period.
E
More kinds of lamps were produced by the Magdalenian culture than by earlier cultures.
More kinds of lamps simply means a greater variety of lamps. But it doesn’t explain why there’s a greater number of lamps associated with the late Upper Paleolithic. We wouldn’t expect a culture with 5 different styles of lamps to have more lamps than a culture with only 1 style.

123 comments