Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of the argument concludes that woven baskets are not necessarily made by Palean as the recent findings turned out similar baskets has been found in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim river from Palea. Although the premises seem to be tenable and plausible at first glance, more scrutiny shed lights to its weakness, and it turns out to be untenable and cannot be accepted as it is in that it rests on a number of premises all of which can be challenged in one way or another.
First of all, the author pointed archaeologist’s new findings out and noticed a plight which is a deep and broad river that makes it demanding Palean people to travel to Lithos to bring them the basket. Although it seems to be sufficient to accept the impossibility of traveling to Lithos by Palean, maybe Palean’s boats have been eradicated over time or purloined by someone. In other words, it seems rational to think that after anchoring the boat in the riverside, someone stole the boats and transferred it to another location. In conclusion, it could weaken the author’s premise.
Second, the author has only considered the Palean boats and not the Lithos one. Maybe some Lithos tourists travel to Palea and bring such baskets to Lithos as a souvenir. In other words, maybe there were some Lithos boats that the author has not considered such a possibility and his premise could be weakened through this possibility.
For the last one, the author assumes that the way to create the basket would be esoteric and the Palean were not going to disclose how to develop such baskets. Maybe some Lithos people have learned how to create a basket and then attempt to make it on their own. Accidentally the baskets that they created have some extent of similarity with the Palean’s one. But it does not mean that Palean and Lithos baskets are the same. So the author’s premise could be challenged in this way.
Having scrutinized all the premises, a plausible conclusion that can be drawn is that the author’s conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean seems untenable as there is a number of question, having been ignored by the author while the answer of could add to the logic of each premise.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK.
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
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: 15 15
No. of Words: 386 350
No. of Characters: 1798 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.432 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.658 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.449 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 130 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 82 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 54 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 29 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.733 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.781 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.377 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.554 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.112 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 318, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...could add to the logic of each premise.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, may, second, so, then, while, in conclusion, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 16.3942115768 18% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1870.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 386.0 441.139720559 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.84455958549 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.43248042346 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71142921202 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.466321243523 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 582.3 705.55239521 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.2259599415 57.8364921388 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.666666667 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7333333333 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => 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: 0.173824837181 0.218282227539 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0685364089855 0.0743258471296 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0606993407147 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107758549196 0.128457276422 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.029943317661 0.0628817314937 48% => 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: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => 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: 11.09 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 98.500998004 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 12.3882235529 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.