The passage provides the strongest support for inferring that Lessing holds which one of the following views?

On the example 1 both alternatives C and E makes an assumption for the whole based on a premises about the part, however only E has an invalid argument, only E can be consider a fallacy of composition. I understood that the difference in both arguments is that while C affirm that something is true for the part (the components are heavy), it also must be true for the whole (the bulldozer is heavy), E denies something, stating that if it isn't true for the part (the brain cells are incapable of thinking), it can't be true for the whole (the brain is incapable of thinking). My question is: Will the fallacy of composition or part to whole occur only when the statement deny something for the part and assume that it isn't true for the whole? Or can it be present when it states that something is true for the part and therefore it must be true for the whole? If this second scenario is true, can you please give me a couple examples? Thanks in advance