Most movie critics believe that sentimentality detracts from aesthetic value. But these critics are wrong, since the ...

mandykuehn on September 19, 2020

Please explain.

jingjingxiao11111@gmail.com on September 26, 2020

Hi I got this question wrong but I think that I understand why D is the right answer now. The argument concludes that the movie critics’ view that sentimentality detracts from aesthetic value is wrong. Why? The author supports his argument by the reason the movie critics came to hold this wrong belief because sentimentality pervades so many movies that its absence makes a movie more interesting to frequent movie-goers like themselves.

The rest of the question is an analogy that better illustrates the meaning of the movie critics’ wrong line of reasoning. That is, claiming that sentimentality which pervades so many movies that its absence makes a movie more interesting to audiences is like claiming that a food flavor is common in food that its common presence detracts the quality of the food.

I find that we can answer this question without second part of the stimulus which includes that unnecessary analogy that doesn’t help answer the question at all so try to answer this question without reading the analogy. The author’s reason to argue that the movie critics are wrong is how movie critics came to hold this belief in the first place:
that sentimentality is too common that its absence would enhance the movie. This is exactly what D is stating, stating that a claim is false based merely on how people came to believe it.

I am not sure if I explained it right so if you can correct me or comment any questions or concerns you have regarding my explanation or any part of this question that would be very helpful. I am not an instructor so I am not confident in my explanation but I find this line of reasoning really explains the correct answer D. Thank you very much.

Emil-Kunkin on October 3, 2022

Agreed Jing Jing! The author does not attack the belief, but only offers an explanation for why critics hold that belief. Maybe the author could have also told us that for some reason, this method of having the belief invalidates it, but the author does not do that.