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, archa

Essay topics:

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 speaker contends that woven baskets that are primarily known to be made exclusively by the Paleans might have been also made by other people, using the evidence that they have found the same baskets in other village, Lithos, segregated with Palean villages by a deep and broad Brim river that surely necessitates a boat to be crossed over, which wasn’t found in Palean villages. It’s quite a simple logical flow, having a lot of flaws in it.

First of all, the information about the Brim River - broad and deep - is an information deduced from current geological situation, not from the period when Paleans were alive. The speaker should think about the geological status back then. The river might have been shallow and narrow enough to walk across for the Paleans, orelse, even extremely, their might have been no river at all. There’s a chance that Palean and Lithos, being an contingent village connected via walking road. Some kind of dramatic (or gradual) geological event that happened during the long historical period between then and now, might have changed the map connecting the two villages.

To corroborate this argument, there should be no vestiges of geological transformation around that area, or a clear evidence that confirms there wasn’t any huge geological events. Sedimentary layers, at least, that can be seen from cliffs around that area, should have no marks of disturbance.

Even if we concede that the river was broad and deep back then, we still cannot surely determine whether the Paleans used boats to cross over the river or not, only with the fact that archaeologists couldn’t find out the remaining evidence of it. There could have been unexpected and unknown historical events that might have burned all the boat without a single trace. The fact that there is no single species of ‘black-colored pigeon’ detected by scientists does not verify the statement “All pigeons are white”. There is still a slight chance that the scientists just couldn’t find them, hiding clandestinely in a cave somewhere around the world. We simply don’t know.

Furthermore, even with the admittance of the conclusion that no boats were used by Paleans, we still cannot jump to the conclusion that the Paleans and Lithos people did not interact with each other. Maybe the river wasn’t the only path connecting the two villages. There might have been some other ways to circumvent the river, connecting the two villages. The two village people might have interacted using that alternative root, letting those Palean baskets be found also in Lithos village. To strengthen the speaker’s argument, a clear evidence that proves the uniqueness of the path connecting the two village is necessary.

To sum up, the argument has a lot of logical defects. Most of the flaws were based on logical dichotomy. No boats found in the Palean area doesn’t mean that they used no boats at all. Existence of river between the two villages doesn’t imply that there are no other roots at all. There are still a lot of possibilities that opens a bunch of uncertainty about the conclusion. Evidences that could clear this uncertainty might help to distinguish the truth of this argument.

Average: 8.2 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 440, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... a chance that Palean and Lithos, being an contingent village connected via walkin...
Line 7, column 452, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
...cies of 'black-colored pigeon' detected by scientists does not verify t...
Line 7, column 685, Rule ID: PRP_RB_NO_VB[1]
Message: Are you missing a verb?
...n a cave somewhere around the world. We simply don't know. Furthermore, even with the ...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, if, may, so, still, then, at least, kind of, first of all, to sum up

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

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 55.5748502994 113% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 16.3942115768 98% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2739.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 530.0 441.139720559 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1679245283 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8006755553 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458490566038 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 828.0 705.55239521 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.154433448 57.8364921388 128% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.56 119.503703932 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.76 5.70786347227 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => 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: 0.180277526136 0.218282227539 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0520574149675 0.0743258471296 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607505196408 0.0701772020484 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107402298288 0.128457276422 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0745778263157 0.0628817314937 119% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.9071856287 160% => 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.

argument 1 -- OK

argument 2 -- not exactly. better to say: maybe people in Lithos have boats.

argument 3 -- OK

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 25 15
No. of Words: 538 350
No. of Characters: 2577 1500
No. of Different Words: 232 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.816 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.79 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.517 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 161 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 112 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.52 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.445 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.44 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.282 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.514 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5