Critical Reasoning

We ought to pay attention only to the intrinsic properties of a work of art. Its other, extrinsic properties are irrelevant to our aesthetic interactions with it. For example, when we look at a painting we should consider only what is directly presented in our experience of it. What is really aesthetically relevant, therefore, is not what a painting symbolizes, but what it directly presents to experience.

The conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is added to the premises?
A. What an art work symbolizes involves only extrinsic properties of that work.
B. There are certain properties of our experiences of artworks that can be distinguished as symbolic properties.
C. Only an artwork's intrinsic properties are relevant to our aesthetic interactions with it.
D. It is possible in theory for an artwork to symbolize nothing.
E. An intrinsic property of an artwork is one that related the work to itself.

OA IS A. please explain this Question.

Hi pappueshwar again ,
Could you provide your opinion on my approach:
Premise 1: Pay attention ONLY to íntrinsic properties, extrinsic properties are IRRELEVANT.
Premise 2: Consider painting direct experience.
Conclusion: Aesthetically relevant: not painting symbolizes but EXP
Question: logical of conclusion. It needs a link: between Symbolize - Experience and Intrinsic - Extrinsic properties.
(A) Symbolize involves extrinsic -> So painting symbolize is not relevant because it's extrinsic -> Correct
(B) Some characteristics of artwork experience >< symbolic properties -> It's not a link the question's looking for -> eliminate
(C) Paraphrase the premise 1 -> eliminate
(D) It's not a link the question's looking for -> eliminate
(E) Paraphrase the premise 1 -> eliminate

So (A) is my answer