The Japanese haiku is defined as a poem of three lines with five sylla

Quote:

The Japanese haiku is defined as a poem of three lines with five syllables in the first line, seven syllables in the second line, and five syllables in the third line. English poets tend to ignore this fact. Disregarding syllable count, they generally call any three-line English poem with a “haiku feel” a haiku. This demonstrates that English poets have little respect for foreign traditions, even those from which some of their own poetry derives.

The reasoning is flawed because it…

Our author tells us some context about haikus. He concludes that English poets hare no respect for foreign traditions. He supports this by stating that English poets ignore the Japanese syllable count and just go with whatever has three lines. This is flawed because the author extrapolates that ignoring an aspect is implicative of disrespect. In simple terms, he is jumping to some wild conclusions.

A. Confuses matters of objective fact with matters of subjective feeling
Having “little respect for foreign traditions” is not a subjective feeling.

B. Draws a conclusion that is broader in scope than is warranted by the evidence advanced
Sounds about right.

C. Relies on stereotypes instead of presenting evidence
There is evidence presented (“disregarding syllable count”)….albeit not the greatest connection.

D. Overlooks the possibility that the case it cites is not unique
Not relevant.

E. Fails to acknowledge that ignoring something implies a negative judgment about that thing.
I almost chose (E) but then realised that the flaw of acknowledging that ignoring something (“syllables”) implies a negative judgement about that thing (“syllables”). In actuality, the negative judgement is about the broader “foreign traditions”.

This is the case of over-generalization. The premise talks only about Japanese Haiku but conclusion consider each foreign tradition.
IMO B

Can someone explain why E is wrong? Or is it like his reasoning is based on him acknowledging the fact that its being disrespectful hence E is out?

This is my subjective vision about this question, so don't judge hard )

A). Confuses matters of objective fact with matters of subjective feeling
There may be overgeneralization but I didn't see any indicator of subjectivity, since there is fact that "English poets tend to ignore this fact".

C. Relies on stereotypes instead of presenting evidence
Although there is generalization, there is fact "English poets tend to ignore this fact", so this choice is also eliminated

D. Overlooks the possibility that the case it cites is not unique
No indication or discussion about uniqueness in context, thats why we can't exactly say whether we considered this factor or not

E. Fails to acknowledge that ignoring something implies a negative judgment about that thing
I think there is logical consequence from fact "English poets tend to ignore this fact" to other information/stimulus(conclusion which serves as conclusion for next sentence) "Disregarding syllable count, they generally call any three-line English poem with a “haiku feel” a haiku" which then leads to conclusion "This demonstrates that English poets have little respect for foreign traditions". Thus it shows that ignoring syllables leads to negative judgment by English poets which make not correct judgement calling “haiku feel".

B. Draws a conclusion that is broader in scope than is warranted by the evidence advanced
Shows that there is really very big jump from "English poets Disregarding syllable count" and which be indication of little respect to The Japanese haiku (Japanese traditions) to for "foreign traditions" (every other tradition than English , not only Japanese)