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 argues that since baskets were found in Lithos and it appears impossible for Paleans to cross the Brim River to get to Lithos, the woven baskets, which were thought to have been made only by Palean people, were actually not uniquely Palean. However, the argument relies on a series of unproven assumptions and is therefore unconvincing as it stands. More evidences are hence needed.
A threshold assumption upon which the argument relies is that the Brim River was as deep and broad as it is now, and therefore Palean would need boats to cross the river. This is not necessarily true. The depth and width of a river subject to a range of factors, such as weather, human activities and so on. It is entirely possible that the river used to be shallow and narrow and hence no boat would be needed for Palean to get to Lithos. What’s more, if the weather was cold and the river was frozen, Paleans could just walk across the river with their baskets. Therefore, weather conditions are important evidence to consider.
Even assuming that crossing river without a boat was not feasible for Paleans, the author relies on additional assumption that no Paleans managed to get to Lithos as no boats have been found. However, it is possible that because of techniques or other factors that are not within archaeologists’ control, boats have not been discovered yet. For example, there may be some reservation policies imposed by government which hinders the excavation. As a result, conclusion cannot be drawn that such boats do not exist. What’s more, even if no boats could really be found, we could not reach the conclusion that boats have never existed. Given that a long time has passed, the boats could be rotten, especially if they were made of wood.
Even assuming that Paleans were truly incapable of getting to Lithos, that does not mean their baskets could not arrive there. The author does not rule out the chance that Lithos are capable of making boats, traveling to Palea and then trading with Paleans for their baskets. Or, it could be that the baskets were flushed there by water. The ability to make boats by Lithos people should be investigated. And the materials of the boat should be given to consider whether it could float above water.
In conclusion, to persuade me that the baskets were made by Lithos people themselves instead of Paleans, clear evidence that the baskets did not come from Paleans should be provided.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- not really
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 421 350
No. of Characters: 1972 1500
No. of Different Words: 191 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.53 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.684 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.339 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 134 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 91 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.048 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.534 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.714 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.295 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.499 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.064 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, hence, however, if, may, really, so, then, therefore, for example, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 13.6137724551 147% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1686.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 347.0 441.139720559 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85878962536 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56560232215 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.495677233429 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => 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: 56.1407031192 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.1764705882 119.503703932 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4117647059 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.82352941176 5.70786347227 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.215777145181 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0653291791014 0.0743258471296 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0776254384036 0.0701772020484 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135314753288 0.128457276422 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0908339096049 0.0628817314937 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 14.3799401198 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => 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.