IMO E. Using negating technique for assumption-type question

Museum visitor: This painting is definitely a Monet. The brush strokes, shading, and subject matter are all characteristic of Monet. The visitor presupposes which of the following:

A) Monet was a great artist --> out of scope

B) Painting is the only type of art that allows a determination of the artist from certain characteristics -->too general

C) Nothing besides brush strokes, shading, and subject matter allows one to identify Monet as the artist of a painting -->negating: there are other things for one to indentify Monet as an painting artist, it does not weaken the argument because it does not refute that those 3 characteristics does not belong to Monet
D) It takes little skill to identify a Monet painting -->irrelevant

E) No other artist used the brush strokes, shading, and subject matter observed in the painting -->
negating: other artists also use those 3 characteristics in their painting. It does weaken that because all painting artists have those 3 characteristics in paintings, any painting artist can be the creator of the painting, not only Monet[/b]

they all seem too general or missing the point, all but E. this one is kind of obvious.

(E)

Good explanation by Minheequang.

I will go with option E this case.