Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with

Essay topics:

Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

The author presents a case where he provides two contrasting views based on two disparage modus operandi. He finally concludes that one of the technique makes more factual conclusions based on some ,stated and unstated , assumptions. A couple of assumptions are flaws which in turn makes the conclusion specious.

The first assumption the author makes is that in twenty years there were no significant changes. He assumes that the system , rearing of the children by an entire village, which prevailed in the past is still applicable in the present. He fails to consider a scenario in which recently a new cultural systems were adopted in which children were raised only by the biological parent. This could prove that Dr Field's conclusion were valid. Moreover the conclusion that the interview-centered method is more accurate would then be baseless. Hence the author's argument hinges upon the assumption that there were no cultural changes that affected how the children were raised.

Subsequently, if the children talked more about their biological parents then it could only mean that they were raised by the biological parent and not by the whole village is the next unstated assumptions. The author doesn't provide any evidences to support this assumptions. If he had given the survey results or expounded on the type of survey questions then the assumption could have been justified. Only the unsupportable assumption can lead to the conclusion , Dr Fields observations are inaccurate. If this assumption is not made then there exist no logical reasoning that can help establish the precise conclusion that the observation-centered approach is invalid. Hence the argument is contingent on the unsustainable presupposition.

Next the author assumes that what applies to a specific case can also apply to the general case . He supposes that just because in a sole situation Dr Fields conclusion are spurious , the whole approach; observation-centered; is also fallacious. Moreover he presumes that if his conclusions are accurate in a particular case, tetra village, then his approach is faultless. This assumption is not corroborated by any evidences but the assumptions are crucial to forming the conclusion. Hence the argument is contingent on the ill-founded assumptions.

The author makes many supposition in the argument. Some of them can be justified , on the other hand few are untenable. Nevertheless they help the author in building the conclusion. If such unwarranted assumptions are not made, the author's argument falls apart. Thus though of questionable logic, the assumptions play a critical role in the argument.

Votes
Average: 8 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2019-06-24 mb94 55 view
2021-08-12 dl25 60 view
2022-07-25 kashvi05 74 view
2017-11-17 zarif1994 29 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user aaish :

Comments

argument 1 -- OK

argument 2 -- better in details: 1. the exact locations where the interviews took place. 2. need to learn more about the interview questions used

argument 3 -- OK

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 382 350
No. of Characters: 1978 1500
No. of Different Words: 179 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.421 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.178 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.991 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.609 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.519 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.739 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.309 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.515 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.132 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5

Yes, It is better now. The following arguments are more specific.

The assumptions:
'my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village.'

The arguments:
1. Another piece of evidence that might help us evaluate this claim involves the exact locations where Dr. Karp’s interviews took place. According to this article, Dr. Karp and his graduate students conducted interviews of “children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia.” If we were to learn that they never interviewed a single Tertian child, it would significantly weaken the conclusion. It could turn out to be the case, for example, that children on Tertia are raised communally, whereas children on other islands nearby are raised by their biological parents.

2. In order to fully evaluate this article, we would also need to learn more about the interview questions that Dr. Karp’s team used. What exactly did they ask? We don’t know, nor do we know what the children’s responses actually were. What did they say about their biological parents? The mere fact that they speak more frequently about their biological parents than they do about other adults does not meant hat they are raised by their biological parents. It would significantly undermine Dr. Karp’s argument if it turned out that the children said things like how much they missed their parents or how their parents had left them in a communal environment. Without knowing WHAT the children said, it is hard to accept Dr. Karp’s conclusion.