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 author of the argument purportedly highlights that the miniatures statues are more valuable than life-size sculptures in Kalinese Island owing to the fact that ancient artists had used molds to create a sculpture. However, the premises upon which he/she puts his/her claim are fallacious. For the support of which some critical, yet ignored question need to be addressed.
First, the author contends that archeologist has discovered molds of hands and heads of human, which show ancient artists had not been skilled in creating sculptures. However, it does not lend credence to the argument since a question that might arise is whether ancient artists just sculpted heads and hands. One point that should be considered is that creating a real size of the sculpture is perplexing and intricate and if ancient artists had used molds for heads and hands, they should have used molds for other parts of the human body. Maybe they used heads molds just in order to make a sculpture more real or similar to human. It is also important to say that create molds need a noticeable skill, which perhaps proves that ancient artists were adroit enough to create statues.
The author also asserts that molds could only use for life-size sculptures. Although it might seem tenable at the face, it has some defects since you can always ask this question if ancient people or artists did not use molds for producing other goods. One of the main, if not the only, problem with the premise is that the author just mentions molds as using for sculptures. In fact, there is a possibility that ancient people in Kalinese Island used those molds for other purposes like heads' molds for hat or hands for gloves and so forth.
Finally, as set forth by the author the Kalinese miniatures were completely different in style and used tools and techniques in order to sculpt. Nevertheless, the rationale behind this premise could be challenged owing to an unsettled question if the number of miniatures was more than life-size sculptures. One point that should not go unnoticed is that maybe create miniatures statues were easier than real size sculpting and ancient artists prefer to create more miniatures. Moreover, perhaps collectors found more miniatures in Kalinese Island than real sculptures and want to make a profit through these miniatures.
Having scrutinized all the premises, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there is a number of question, having been ignored by the author while the answer of which could add to the logic of each premise.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ignored question need to be addressed. First, the author contends that archeolo...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2132.0 2260.96107784 94% => OK
No of words: 426.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00469483568 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51912825905 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.448356807512 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 644.4 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.7169937887 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.411764706 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0588235294 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.82352941176 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => 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: 0.203086375414 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0729560948473 0.0743258471296 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0417392582494 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113566314892 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0371912571041 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.8 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 98.500998004 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.