The following appeared in an article written by
Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
“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.”
Dr. Karp, in his article, claims that his interview-centered approach to studying cultures is superior to the observation-centered approach adopted by Dr. Field. To support his claim, Dr. Karp tries to contradict Dr. Field's findings that the children of Tertia were reared by an entire village. According to Dr. Karp, the evidence opposes these findings and shows that it is actually their biological parents that are responsible for the children's upbringing. However, Dr. Karp's argument is full of assumptions and lacks evidence as discussed below.
Firstly, we see that Dr. Field had performed his observations twenty years ago whereas the interview is recent compared to it. Twenty years is a great deal to time and a lot can change in twenty years. Not only that but also the fact Dr. Karp interviews the children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia. It might be the case that only the Tertian children are raised communally whereas the children from the islands are raised by their biological parents.
Moreover, we don't know anything about the interview. The argument talks nothing about how many children were interviewed, or what were the questions that were asked to the children. It might be possible that not a single child from Tertia was interviewed. And is that is the case, Dr. Karp's argument cannot prove Dr. Field's observations invalid. We also don't know anything about the questions asked in the interview. If the questions that were asked revolved more around the biological parents, then the children would clearly speak more about their biologicals parents.
In addition to that, Dr. Karp assumes that simply talking more about biological parents in an interview implies that the parents have a
larger role in the children's upbringing. This makes for a fallacious argument as it contains an unwarranted jump in logic. There is no evidence provided to link the two and under no circumstances can this conclusion be drawn simply on the bases of time spent in talking about the parents. More concrete evidence is required to confirm that indeed it is only the biological parents that are responsible for the rearing of the children in the village. If no such evidence is found, Dr. Karp's argument will completely lose its merit.
Therefore, we can see that Dr. Karp's argument as it stands now can not be taken at its face value. Not only is the evidence severely lacking, but the flow of the argument is fallacious as well. Therefore, a lot more evidence and a more cogent line of argument are required if we are to compare the two methods of studying cultures.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-01 | Sophy@ | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | dhruv7315 | 77 | view |
| 2023-08-19 | Mayuresh08 | 64 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | Dinesh4518 | 85 | view |
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 438 350
No. of Characters: 2127 1500
No. of Different Words: 191 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.575 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.856 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.729 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.909 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.688 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.636 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.538 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.143 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...eir biological parents. Moreover, we dont know anything about the interview. The ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 355, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...r. Fields observations invalid. We also dont know anything about the questions asked...
^^^^
Line 7, column 136, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nterview implies that the parents have a larger role in the childrens upbringing....
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, whereas, in addition, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 28.8173652695 146% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2174.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 436.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98623853211 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56953094068 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77797650067 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.440366972477 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 655.2 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.3191506906 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.8181818182 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8181818182 23.324526521 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.54545454545 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.284485759788 0.218282227539 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0915861193472 0.0743258471296 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0901957809928 0.0701772020484 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153540255466 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0933477771074 0.0628817314937 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.66 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 98.500998004 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.