"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."

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 given argument is full of fallacies. It concludes that interview-centered method of studying cultures is more accurate than the observation-centered approach based on many unwarranted assumptions. If these assumptions are proved wrong, then the argument will fall apart.

First of all, the argument bases its conclusion on the interview with children of different islands, including Tertia. However, in doing so, it fails to give any details about the interview. Some of the details missing out could be-what kind of questions were asked to children during the interview. It is possible that the questions asked to children weren’t varied and largely evolved around the activities that are mostly done by their parents. For example, children could have just asked two or three questions such as who drops them to school, who cooks meal for them, etc, which by chance could have been done by their parents. Hence, the argument needs to draw out the type of questions that children were asked in the interview and also whether the questions were representative of the study and enough for coming to the conclusion.

Additionally, there is no connection shown between the interview of children and the truth behind the rearing of the child in Tertia. The connection drawn by the argument is pretty vague. There is no study or thesis done or discussed in the argument that proves that children talking more about their parents suggests that their upbringing is done only by their parents. The argument needs to delineate on any such evidence to strengthen its position.

Building on the implication that the information received by the children during the interview is representative, still this doesn’t provide sufficient evident as to generalise that observation-centered approach of studying culture isn’t valid. This is just one data point, where in, interview-centered approach might have surpassed the first. But, it is still wrong to generalise the output.
Although, it might be true that observation-centered study isn’t superior to interview-centered study, argument’s way of proving is rife with holes and needs to be addressed if the conclusion needs to be accepted.

Votes
Average: 5.3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
GMAT/GRE Argument Task

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 192, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...o give any details about the interview. Some of the details missing out could be-what kind ...
^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, so, still, then, as to, for example, kind of, such as, first of all

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 55.5748502994 92% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1870.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 346.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40462427746 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29808172203 2.78398813304 118% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.50289017341 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 557.1 705.55239521 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => 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: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.4573120281 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.0 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3529411765 23.324526521 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.17647058824 5.70786347227 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => 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: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186965224969 0.218282227539 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0587452080624 0.0743258471296 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0466690259139 0.0701772020484 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0964204372533 0.128457276422 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0338101908478 0.0628817314937 54% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 12.5979740519 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 12.3882235529 52% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.

here goes the sample arguments:
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: 17 15
No. of Words: 350 350
No. of Characters: 1791 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.325 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.117 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.17 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 115 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 97 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.588 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.677 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.588 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.332 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.094 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5