lsat-25-2-20

Pieces of music consist of sounds and silences presented to the listener in a temporal order. A painting, in contrast, is not presented one part at a time to the viewer; there is thus no particular path that the viewer’s eye must follow in order to “read” the painting. Therefore, an essential distinction between the experiences of hearing music and of viewing paintings is that hearing music has a temporal dimension but viewing a painting has none.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because

(A) the argument does not allow for the possibility of being immersed in experiencing a painting without being conscious of the passage of time

(B) the argument is based on a very general definition of music that does not incorporate any distinctions among particular styles

(C) the argument fails to bring out the aspects of music and painting that are common to both as forms of artistic expression

(D) relying on the metaphor of “reading” to characterize how a painting is viewed presupposes the correctness of the conclusion to be drawn on the basis of that characterization（E）

(E) the absence of a particular path that the eye must follow does not entail that the eye follows no path

这题什么意思啊，完全看不懂的说，哪位NN能给解答一下吗，谢谢了

给个类似的错误推理:

某一天问号同学去参加一个酒会, 酒会上有n种饮料被提供，包括百事可乐，可口可乐，七喜等等。问号不必只喝其中的某种特定饮料，所以在这个酒会上，问号同学什莫也喝不了。

明白了，谢谢dphxmg