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."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
It might seem logical to agree with the argument in the passage that children in Tertia are raised by their biological parents rather than the whole society and additionally, the interview-based approach is superior to the observation-based approach. Nevertheless, in order to fully evaluate the conclusion, we need a considerable amount of evidence.
The first piece of evidence that we need to evaluate Dr. Karp’s argument is information about whether or not Tertia has changed significantly in the past twenty years. As Field admits in the article, the experiment made by Dr. Field was conducted twenty years ago. It is highly probable that there were some great climate or social changes in the Tertia island which could alter the rearing tradition. For instance, the social structure might undergo great revolutions, a more civilized and democratic government was established there and required all children be raised by their own parents. Plus, the lower birth rate during the twenty years may facilitate the children rearing process in each family. In this case, the argument of both Karp and Field could hold under the constraint of different time background.
Another evidence important to analyze the convincingness of claim is about the specific experiment design. Dr. Karp mentions in the article that his experiment was conducted in many islands including Tertia. However, he does not offer more evidence how many proportion of experiment was done in Tertia and the result of interview in Tertia alone, which could undermine the outcome to a great extent. More specifically, There might be one thousands interviews of which only two or three were done in Tertia. What is more, though children in Tertia talks about their parents a little, children in other islands where they are raised by their biological parents may talk much more since the geological proximity cannot guarantee the culture similarity, thus making the result deceiving. Additionally, the interview conducted by Dr. Karp seems to only concern about who they talk about, but not what they are talking, which is confusing as well, since children might just talk to the researchers how they are rejected by their parents. In both scenario, we need more clear knowledge about the experiment per se to make the argument more convincing.
Last but not least, the author also implicates that the interview-centered approach is more convincing the observational-centered approach. It is thornier to handle this grandiose claim. To begin with, Dr. Karp need the evidence mentioned above to fully convince his own argument first to prove that his interview-centered is effective. Granted that the interview-centered approach in the study of rearing tradition in Tertia island is more effective, a single success cannot validate the whole approach, thus a larger amount of experiments are required to fully evaluate the methodology itself, ideally thousands of anthropological experiments in each approach.
Clearly, in order to better understanding the strength and the weakness of Dr. Karp’s argument, it is necessary to know more about Tertia island’s development over the past twenty years, the specific interview design. Moreover, to extend the single case to fully evaluate the superiority of an approach in anthropology study, considerable amount of study analysis is needed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-12 | Devendra Prasad Chalise | 16 | view |
| 2019-07-21 | Marcello | 89 | view |
| 2019-06-28 | kap | 50 | view |
| 2019-06-07 | Gh.Ne | 55 | view |
| 2018-10-22 | avinash2618 | 83 | view |
- 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 rat 66
- 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 rat 66
- 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 rat 66
- Laws should not be stationary and fixed. Instead, they should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Children are benefited in important ways by taking care of pet 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 100, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...rp's argument is information about whether or not Tertia has changed significantly in the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 254, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun proportion seems to be countable; consider using: 'many proportions'.
Suggestion: many proportions
...er, he does not offer more evidence how many proportion of experiment was done in Tertia and th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 435, Rule ID: A_HUNDREDS[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. Consider using: 'one thousand'
Suggestion: one thousand
...tent. More specifically, There might be one thousands interviews of which only two or three w...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, thus, well, for instance, to begin with, what is more, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 76.0 55.5748502994 137% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2854.0 2260.96107784 126% => OK
No of words: 527.0 441.139720559 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.4155597723 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79129216042 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.13055716258 2.78398813304 112% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.46679316888 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 887.4 705.55239521 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.5001916831 57.8364921388 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.904761905 119.503703932 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0952380952 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.47619047619 5.70786347227 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218957359387 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0704560218215 0.0743258471296 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0597199427398 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126375920584 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0591775309616 0.0628817314937 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.3799401198 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.