There is a popular view among literary critics that a poem can never be accurately paraphrased because a poem is itself the only accurate expression of its meaning.
Conclusion
The view that poetry cannot be accurately paraphrased is false. (i.e. poetry can be accurately paraphrased)
Evidence
The critics say a poem can't be paraphrased because a poem itself is the only accurate expression of its meaning.
But these critics think that their own paraphrases of poems are accurate.
Evaluate
It's hard to argue with the idea that the critics are wrong about something, given that they're saying "no poem can be accurately paraphrased" as well as "our paraphrases are accurate".
They are definitely contradicting themselves. But the author's conclusion didn't say, "Thus these critics are contradicting themselves". It says their view about whether poetry can be accurately paraphrased is wrong.
The author didn't present any evidence for or against the idea that poetry can be accurately paraphrased. She told us that these critics consider their own paraphrases accurate, but we wouldn't accept their opinions as proof that their paraphrases are accurate.
Goal
This feels kind of like an Unproven vs. Proven False move. The author found a problem with someone's argument (in this case: their other beliefs contradict their conclusion).
His conclusion should be like,
Given a contradiction, "poems can never be accurately paraphrased" + "our own paraphrases are accurate", we know they can't both be right, but we don't know which one is correct.
The author is arbitrarily choosing one of those two options.