Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archa

Essay topics:

Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.

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.

The author argues that on account of the fact that Palean baskets have recently been found in Lithos, a village thought to be inaccessible from Palea, the baskets are not unique to the village as has been considered before. This, however, is not a cogent argument on account of the reasons stated ahead.

The author assumes that since Lithos and Palea lie on the opposite banks of the river Brim, which is a wide and deep river, and since no Palean boats have been found yet, the Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. Thus, implying that the Palean people were unable to cross the river. The lack of findings of Palean boats does in no way, however, mean that they were unable to cross the river. What if they did have boats but these boats have just not been found yet? Or maybe, the Palean people were expert swimmers and thus could transport their goods in that manner. Further, the author mentions nothing about boats of the people of Lithos. What if they had boats and were the ones who traded with the people of Palea and took back the Palean baskets to their own settlements? With just one piece of incomplete evidence, it cannot be warranted that the Paleans never crossed the river Brim. Thus the author’s argument holds no water.

Further, the author makes no mention of the trading of Palean baskets by the ancient Paleans to other settlements. If the author had presented some evidence regarding this area, it would have further strengthened the argument. What if the Paleans traded these baskets with other cities near them as well? This would justify the fact - that since Palean goods have been found in other cities, Palea’s inhabitants generated wealth through the trading of these baskets and it would thus make sense that because the baskets have been found in Lithos, they could have been traded to them by the Paleans. Thus, without any evidence of this, the author’s argument gets weakened.

Moreover, the author does not mention anything about the materials from which the Palean baskets were made. What if the resources required were situated only in or in close proximity to Palea? What if no such resources were found near Lithos? Maybe there were some special ingredients found near Palea that enabled them to create these baskets. This would clearly point to the argument that Palean baskets are indeed unique to Palea. Thus, without enough data, the authors argument is undermined.

After the said analysis, the argument, as it is now, stands falsified. The author needs to provide more evidence in order to support their stand. Without the necessary proofs however, the argument holds no water.

Votes
Average: 5.5 (3 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2023-08-09 M1randa 55 view
2023-08-06 yuktapradeep 55 view
2023-07-30 Vivi5428 66 view
2023-07-30 Vivi5428 68 view
2023-07-09 ZHOU0444 16 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 896, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e Paleans never crossed the river Brim. Thus the author's argument holds no wat...
^^^^
Line 7, column 168, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'proximity'.
Suggestion: proximity
...es required were situated only in or in close proximity to Palea? What if no such resources wer...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 466, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...o Palea. Thus, without enough data, the authors argument is undermined. After the sa...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, thus, well

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2206.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 450.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90222222222 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6057793516 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.25583577424 2.78398813304 81% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.431111111111 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 658.8 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 57.5389120509 57.8364921388 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.24 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.56 5.70786347227 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.273045190623 0.218282227539 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0777233283445 0.0743258471296 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0763171193847 0.0701772020484 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162732043525 0.128457276422 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772514325239 0.0628817314937 123% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.6 14.3799401198 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.32208582834 91% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.

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: 25 15
No. of Words: 450 350
No. of Characters: 2121 1500
No. of Different Words: 181 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.606 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.713 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.089 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 144 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 94 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 46 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 20 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.323 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.64 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.326 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.511 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.137 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5