Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archaeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could be used only for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this discovery, collectors predict that the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
The argument being made here is that the life-size clay statues are very lifelike because the statues have been created using molds of actual bodies, and not using sculpting tools and techniques. It is further argued that the lack of sculpting tools would also bolster this argument. Thus, it is predicted that the value if the miniature sculptures would increase, and the value of the life-size statues would decrease. Although the arguments being presented seems reasonable at the first glance, some important questions are to be answered if to conclude on the validity of the argument.
Firstly, it has been argued that the statues are too life-like, and the explanation to the human likeness is that the heads and hands are made using molds of actual bodies. To validate this claim, first it must be examined whether all the statues are having the same design of heads and hands, as it would be the case if it is made using the same molds. It is not reasonable to assume that a separate mold would be created to cater to each individual sculpture, and the same molds would be used to create different sculptures.
Secondly, only the molds for the head and the hands have been mentioned. Although they are important components, it the other areas like the torso, thighs, feet among others are also equally important. If the other parts of the statue are just as exquisite and lifelike as the hands and the head, and no molds are discovered for these parts, it would severely weaken the argument that no sculpting tools are techniques were employed in creating these statues.
Thirdly, it is claimed that the lack of tools points to the fact that the statue was made using molds. This claim, similar to the previous one is not substantiated with required evidence. The lack of tools might be because clay statues are very malleable, and does not require sophisticated tools to design them, and a few simple tools with the required expertise would allow the creation of the statues.
Finally, it has been predicted that the value of the life-size statues would decrease and the value of the miniature statues would increase. This again is not validated using any compelling logic or evidence. The underlying assumption being made here seems to be that people value hand made object more that ones created using molds, although true in some cases cannot be generalized, for example, even the most expensive cars are made using some kind of molds. In addition, people may even value the statue more because it is made from the molds of the actual human body, and the owners could own the likeness of an actual human being who lived during that period.
To conclude, the assumptions that the statue is made using only molds without sculpting tools and techniques has not been substantiated with the required information and evidence. Further the prediction that is being made of the increase in value of the miniature and decrease in value of the life-size statues have not been made in light of compelling reasons. So without furnishing the necessary proof, the argument being made cannot be sustained.
Comments
Essay evaluation 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: 20 15
No. of Words: 528 350
No. of Characters: 2522 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.794 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.777 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.392 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 91 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.19 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.65 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.361 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.592 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, for example, in addition, kind of, in some cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 47.0 19.6327345309 239% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 28.8173652695 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2635.0 2260.96107784 117% => OK
No of words: 528.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99053030303 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79356345386 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48916312284 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.388257575758 0.468620217663 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 800.1 705.55239521 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.67365269461 478% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.1785323767 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.75 119.503703932 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4 23.324526521 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6 5.70786347227 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.160733552925 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0614073672885 0.0743258471296 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0485139142907 0.0701772020484 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100055312236 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0245618087949 0.0628817314937 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => 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.