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 argument claims that Palean baskets were not uniquely palean.To support this claim, the author cites that the palean basket was found in lithos and there is no mode of transportation has been found for transporting the baskets. On several ground, this evidence provides little credible support for the authors claim.
To begin with, the author provides no information about the place of manufacturing of the basket. The author has stated that it was found in the village of Palea, but he didn’t provide any information about the manufacturing and the selling part. May be the basket were just sold there and it was produced somewhere else may be in the land of lithos.
Even assuming that the the basket was found in lithos doesn’t actually mean that the basket previously found in village of Palea is not unique. Because may the people themself might have brought the basket for marketing. Or few travellers might have brought it to lithos from palea and left it. Or may be because of the natural calamity the basket could have come all across the river.
Another problem with the argument is that the author states the river as deep and broad, may be at that time the river would have been short and narrow. Or it would not been in existence at that time of period. Perhaps there was a shortage of water supply and there were no sign of river, and people easily moved around place and transported the basket.
The author claims relies on yet another unsubstantiated assumption: that the boat which would have been used by the people to cross the river was not found. However, this is unnecessary to assume because there might be any other reason for the boat to be not found. Even if the basket was transported using the boat, it might have broken down or might be set on fire by people itself for some other emergency purpose. Or maybe there were some natural calamity for the unfound boat.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen its statement the author should include the manufacturing place as well as selling place of the basket. Author should also provide additional evidence about the river origin and the whereabouts of the river at those times. Finally, to better evaluate the argument I would need to know all the above mentioned knowledge along with any other natural calamity occurring at those time of period, if so, to what extent the calamity effected the place.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-11-20 | Siddarth G | 66 | view |
| 2016-11-20 | Siddarth G | 50 | view |
- 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 66
- 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 50
- 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 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 66, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: To
...Palean baskets were not uniquely palean.To support this claim, the author cites th...
^^
Line 1, column 236, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun ground seems to be countable; consider using: 'several grounds'.
Suggestion: several grounds
... found for transporting the baskets. On several ground, this evidence provides little credible...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 257, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...manufacturing and the selling part. May be the basket were just sold there and it ...
^^
Line 5, column 20, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...e land of lithos. Even assuming that the the basket was found in lithos doesn't...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 20, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...e land of lithos. Even assuming that the the basket was found in lithos doesn't...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, however, if, may, so, then, well, in conclusion, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2039.0 2260.96107784 90% => OK
No of words: 420.0 441.139720559 95% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85476190476 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52701905584 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51689416461 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 204.123752495 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440476190476 0.468620217663 94% => OK
syllable_count: 638.1 705.55239521 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.67365269461 358% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5481597961 57.8364921388 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.95 119.503703932 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.324526521 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.173934831594 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0606305312986 0.0743258471296 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0484055114983 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101270535775 0.128457276422 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0538017424252 0.0628817314937 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.3799401198 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.