PT151 · S4 · Q4 Art critic: Nowadays, museum visitors

Out of Scope: more pieces Causal Speculation Since this answer doesn't contain the New Concept in the Conclusion (less willing to engage), it's not tempting on a first pass. The author doesn't say anything about the number of pieces that people see nowadays vs. back in the day. This answer is probably trying to get people to speculate a causal backstory for the premise -- "Why do people spend less than a minute looking at most art? Maybe it's because they are in more of a hurry to get through all the works in the museum." Sure maybe that's why. Maybe people just see the same number of pieces but spend less time overall in the museum. Who knows? The author doesn't need to believe that people nowadays see more pieces. If we negate this and say that people nowadays see around the same number of pieces as before, that wouldn't hurt the argument at all. The author would still be able to say, "Yes they see the same number of pieces, but since they look so quickly at most of them, they're not really engaging with the pieces as much."

Out of Scope: ease of taking snapshots Since this answer doesn't contain the New Concept in the Conclusion (less willing to engage), it's not tempting on a first pass. Although "taking snapshots" is mentioned, it's mentioned in a meaningless aside. If I say, "Dave is coming to the party tonight, perhaps in a tan suit", I have only committed to the idea that he's coming to the party. I'm not assuming anything about tan suits. This author hasn't committed to any ideas about taking snapshots, other than saying that museum goers might take a snapshot of some works of art. She never said it was easy to take a snapshot, and she never committed to any causal connection between the ease of taking photos and the speed with which visitors move through the museum. The author was connecting "less willingness to engage with the art" to the speed with which visitors move through the museum.

Since this answer doesn't contain the New Concept in the Conclusion (less willing to engage), it's not tempting on a first pass. The argument has nothing to do with how much visitors are enjoying their experience. It's only about whether people are less willing to engage with art. The author is probably assuming that "visitors would be more likely to engage with art if they took more time with individual works of art", since she seems to be assuming "if you take as little time as under a minute, then you're not as willing to engage".

The author is assuming that, "taking snapshots of works of art does not allow visitors to fully engage with those works of art later". But she doesn't need to assume people usually don't look at their pictures afterward. This answer also doesn't address the New Concept in the Conclusion (less willing to engage) and it focuses on a totally tangential part of the stimulus (perhaps take a snapshot).