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.
<span style="font-size: 19.36px;">In the article provided, the anthropologist, Dr. Karp, has the following two assertions. First, Karp claims that Dr. Filed's statement that children in Tertia are brought up by an entire village is faulty. Second, they also insist that interview-centred method is of higher validity than the observation-centered approach. Both allegations are based on assumptions and would risk being refutation should such assumptions be spurious.
First and foremost, the first claim that Karp made is wildly based on the assumption that children talking much more about their biological parents is a result of being nurtured solely by said parents. While it is reasonable that upbringing from biological parents can lead to children integrate their parents into multiple facets of conversation, their is no proof whatsover to maintain that the existence of the latter is because of the former. It is still plausable that children in Tertia are reared by the aggregated village and still mention their birth parents frequently in their dialogues. The following are some other possibilities for the high recurrence of parents in speech. One could be that they simply live with their parents for most of the time, and still spend a considerable portion of the day interacting with the society. Another alternative is that they are more comfortable mentioning their parents and hence use their names in their conversations more frequently.
Equally noteworthy is how Karp's second assertion could be undermined. Their allegation that interviews are better than observation is based solely on this one event from Field. It can be seen that Karp assumes that observation is inferior to interviews in all scenarios. While it may be true that Field's observation in the Tertia had been erroneous, it is apocryphal for Karp to generalize all scenarios and demerit all types of observations. In many island cultures, there could be a dearth of interpreters who speak both English and the native tongue. Situations like these would make interviews difficult or even impossible to conduct. What's more, the recount of villagers could be misconstrued and subjective, rendering their interviews biased and inaccurate. In such cases, it bears no doubt that observation may still prove to be more useful than interviews.
By way of conclusion I would like to restate how Karp's arguments could be precipitious. Firstly, the claim that Field's conclusion is invalid is based entirely on the assumption that the only reason why children are garrelous about their biological parents is because they are raised soley by said parents. Secondly, the allegation that interview-centered methods is better than observation-centered ones is likely to be specious, as there exists a multitude of situations where interviews are impossible to conduct or blemished by subjective descriptions. In a nutshell, Karp's assertions are based on assumptions that are not proven, and may be entirely spurious if such assumptions are unjustified.</span><br>
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 476 350
No. of Characters: 2516 1500
No. of Different Words: 237 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.671 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.286 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.102 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 178 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 139 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 104 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 83 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.636 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.02 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.591 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.284 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.464 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.05 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 349, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...s into multiple facets of conversation, their is no proof whatsover to maintain that ...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Equally,
...eir conversations more frequently. Equally noteworthy is how Karps second assertio...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 640, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...ifficult or even impossible to conduct. Whats more, the recount of villagers could be...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, while, no doubt, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 44.0 19.6327345309 224% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 28.8173652695 153% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2589.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 471.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49681528662 5.12650576532 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65859790218 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.40317781902 2.78398813304 122% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501061571125 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 780.3 705.55239521 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3074021466 57.8364921388 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.681818182 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4090909091 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.13636363636 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => 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: 0.151809110062 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0493832547376 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0651032662396 0.0701772020484 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10836040649 0.128457276422 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0742089427315 0.0628817314937 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.62 12.5979740519 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.