Art historian: Great works of art have often elicited outrage when first presented; in Europe, Stravinsky' s Rite of Spring prompted a riot, and Manet' s Dejeuner sur 1' herbe elicited outrage and derision. So, since it is clear that art is often shocking, we should not hesitate to use public funds to support works of art that many people find shocking. Which one of the following is an assumption that the art historian's argument requires in order for its conclusion to be properly drawn? ['Art used to be more shocking than it currently is.', 'Most art is shocking.', 'Public funds should support art.', 'Anything that shocks is art.']