The argument laid out by A.O. Scott is moral in its message. The author is writing directly counter to his current occupation, practically laying out the framework of his occupation as a critic and what the job entails. However, his reasons are noble, and he proclaims that all humans are here to criticize. For what would our human minds be if we were not to challenge the knowledge we know and the information around us. The author continues in saying that criticism does not have to be confined to a certain group or guild and demonstrates the consequences of doing so. For example, as a critic in the film community, the author witnesses the bias of the Oscars awards first hand. When people have no cause but to just prop up their friends, they tend to do less thinking on their opinion and more calculating on whether the public will catch up to the master plan. Now we are not talking conspiracy theories here, rather plain and simple ignorance to others; paying no attention to anyone other then a friend. It seems that year after year, despite numerous deserving films, the movies and actors that always seem to win are white and repeating nominees. I am not one for affirmative action, but I do believe in equality, and fairness is not happening at the Oscars. Therefore, these critics opinions mean little to the public now, as their votes they cast are almost predictable.

It takes a principled person to dangle his position in public and ridicule it. So far as to even encourage others to do what he set out to do in the beginning, criticize. Because A.O. Scott realizes that people will no longer stand for what is being told to them, and he realizes the greatness each individual is capable of. To be human is to find problems, to evaluate, to analyze, to challenge, and to offer alternatives. All these strike the creativity of the human mind, the main initiative A.O. Scott set out to preserve when he struck his first note on his keyboard for this article.