Ullman implicitly assumes that music doesn’t manipulate the emotions, simply because musicians do not intend to manipulate the emotions. He overlooks the possibility that musicians’ intentions for their music might be different from the actual effects of their music.

Ullman doesn’t say anything about who has the power to censor music. Regardless, whether these people would censor other forms of expression is irrelevant. Ullman is only addressing the restriction of music.

This is true, but it doesn't matter because Ullman is only addressing Plato’s argument for allowing the censorship of music. He concludes that Plato’s argument is misguided; whether other arguments are more convincing is irrelevant.

Both Plato and Ullman are only addressing whether music manipulates the emotions and should be restricted. Whether other forms of art are more harmful than music is irrelevant.

Even if some artists are trying to manipulate people’s emotions and don’t admit it, this wouldn’t affect Ullman’s argument. We have to accept his premise that “musicians seek not to manipulate the emotions but to create beauty.”