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

In this argument the writer of the letter asserts that his study proves that children are talking about their biological parents than about other adults in Tertia. on the other hand , Dr. field conducted a survey and concluded that children were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological families. Furthermore , the writer notes that unlike Dr. Fields study twenty years ago, his recent study’s integrity is valid .and also he concluded that his internet centered method provide more plausible understanding of child rearing traditions.this argument defies simple logic and suffers from several critical fallacies.

To begin with , the writer mentions that his interned based method is more valid than Dr Fields method, but he provides no evidence to convince the readers. moreover, we are not informed about the scope and validity of the survey .the writer equates his study with Dr fields study which was conducted 20 years ago.on the other hand he fails to establish any correlation between two studies. the writer provides no evidenced whatsoever that the two studies are comparable about their scope, breadth and also veracity.

Secondly ,the writer cites that Dr field observations and his conclusion. however, he provides no proof for his survey.We do not know how many children were surveyed and these children of course are not the same in Dr. Fields study.Because they were not born when Dr. field was visiting the village.Also the writer does not take into other plausible causes that may result the controversial conclusion between two studies.It is impossible to pinpoint that his study is more valid and veracity of his argument is more reasonable than Dr. Fields argument only based on an interview centered method which there is no forth evidence was given.

In summary , the writer of the letter fails to establish a causal relationship between his study and Dr. Fields study.the evidences presented are extremely weak and no relevant to conclusion.perhaps the writer solely interviewed 2 children and concluded that his study is more valid.For a stronger argument the writer could provide forth evidence associated Dr. Fields observation method with his interview method.The evidence are unwarranted and also not well reasoned

Votes
Average: 6 (6 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2022-01-28 piyushac123 80 view
2021-06-04 wurstkopf123 view
2021-01-30 uwaiseibna view
2020-05-10 shubhamaggarwal 81 view
2013-11-08 manshu 67 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user mehmetycaliska… :

Comments

flaws:
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.857 0.12

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 7 15
No. of Words: 366 350
No. of Characters: 1874 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.374 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.12 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.61 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 98 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 52.286 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 28.976 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.857 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.534 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.722 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.238 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5