The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
"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."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The article written by the anthropologist, Dr. Karp is lauded with assumptions. The article assumes much about Dr. Field`s research methods and results namely his discovery that a group of children in Tertia are raised by the village rather than biological parents. Some assumptions made include that both scientists researched the same group of people, that Dr. Field only observed the people and did not directly speak to them, and that in the span of twenty years, the people did not evolve.
The primary assumption made in Dr. Karp`s article is that, although it had been twenty years since Dr. Field`s research I Tertia, the people of the island had not evolved. In the span of years, decades, and centuries humans have a tendency to evolve technologically and culturally. As an example, twenty years ago, computers were massive, people were listening to CDs, and most everyone used a landline telephone. Today, every single one of these technologies has been condensed into a device that fits in your palm. Who`s to say that the people of Tertia have not also evolved culturally, albeit in a more primitive way? It is possible, and highly likely, that within the past twenty years, the residents have progressed into a more parental society as opposed to a group society. This could be due to changes in the people`s attitudes or even a lessened need to help rear each other`s children. Additionally, it is not likely that Dr. Karp even spoke to the same group of people as Dr. Field.
As years go by, so do generations. With each passing generation, trends and methods of doing things evolve as well. It is possible that the children Dr. Karp spoke to were the children or even grandchildren of the people who Dr. Field observed. The assumption that just because Dr. Karp spoke to the same society of people as Dr. Field, he spoke to the exact same people is flawed. In reality, it is not only the fact that he did not speak to the same people, but also the fact that the younger generation may well have done away with the group society that Dr. Karp had a different experience and, therefore made a great generalization and dismissal of Dr. Field`s work.
The final assumption made by Dr. Karp is that, just because he obtained different results than Dr. Field, Dr. Field`s results and methods are invalid. This is not only a gross conclusion, but it is also disrespectful to Dr. Field and a naive way of thinking. It was twenty years between the two scientists` trips. In the twenty years, research methods probably changed as did technology, resources, and opinions. Why is it so difficult to believe that a group in another society can change as well? Dr. Karp`s new methods may be more useful, but he is certainly dismissing a massive amount of valid information by ignoring the fact that cultures change.
To recapitulate, the assumptions in this article are not only immense, but also naive. If societies did not change, scientists would not even be able to do this type of research. The assumptions mentioned would severely weaken Dr. Karp`s presented argument.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/story/gre-argument-essay-topic-21-outline
----------------------------
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: 529 350
No. of Characters: 2475 1500
No. of Different Words: 218 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.796 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.679 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.567 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 170 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 77 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.16 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.841 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.36 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.303 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.475 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.117 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, so, therefore, 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 : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2618.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 529.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94896030246 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79583152331 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85740904182 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449905482042 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 793.8 705.55239521 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: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 9.0 1.67365269461 538% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9870384727 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.72 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.16 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.56 5.70786347227 27% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 17.0 4.67664670659 364% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.276459863986 0.218282227539 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0808400855851 0.0743258471296 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0735351291735 0.0701772020484 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160842059064 0.128457276422 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0637069889007 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => 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: 11.43 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => 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.