@JayDee8732 @meisen The author tells us that because 18th-C European aesthetics can't provide a complete theory of aesthetics, there cannot be a complete theory.
This seems to be ignoring any - any at all - other potential theories of aesthetics. The 18th-C in Europe is not the end-all-be-all of art. There could be any other potential theories out there, and perhaps one of those provides a complete or otherwise more encompassing theory!
That is why E is correct. It tells us the argument is vulnerable to the criticism that it assumes 18th-C European aesthetics is as encompassing a theory as there can be.
