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.
Since there were other similar baskets found in areas that are out of reach for the Palean people, the author deduced that the origin of the “Palean” baskets is not solely Palean. Yet, the deduction relies on assumptions, for which there is no clear evidence; therefore, the argument is flawed.
The author assumes that the only way, diverse communities across both riversides could reach each other, was to cross the Brim River. However, we are not sure if archaic people in that territory had different means to commute. Perhaps, they used horses to reach each other by a long distant dry land travels. In addition, assuming the Brim River did not go through any changes throughout the history, and assuming both communities could cross the river only by boats, there is no clear-cut evidence that they did not use boats. In fact, they might have used wooden boats which throughout the history were decomposed, and for these boats to be discovered is by archeologists to search for findings of such material or in ancient documentation, such as cave paintings or ancient transcripts. If none of this evidence has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.
It seems that the author assumed that the people in Lithos did not have any commodity relations with the Palean people. Perhaps, Palean baskets were bought from the Palean people by the Lithos society. However, there is not enough evidence for this to be assumed as well. If the writer had cited evidence to back his position, such as transcripts about the relations between both communities, or current research or/and historical review regarding the socioeconomic nature of these nations, then these assumptions might be stronger, and the argument might hold water.
One of the main important questions that should have been asked is who inhabited the Lithos village? Perhaps, Lithos residents were not entirely different than the Palean people in using baskets and living by the riverside, because they were in fact Palean as well. It is highly noticeable in the first paragraph of how narrow the initial scope of exploration was (i.e. immediate vicinity). And maybe widening such narrow scope of inquiry and uncovering similar findings actually means that both places had the same inhabitants. Again for the writer to make such assertion, additional historian information, valid and reliable research data and archeological evidence are needed.
In conclusion, the deduction as it is currently stands is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to cite some evidence (perhaps in a form of a systematic study and broad research), then it would be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the deduction that “Palean” baskets are not only Palean. Unless more evidence is provided, the readers of the current argument should find it unpersuasive.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 473 350
No. of Characters: 2374 1500
No. of Different Words: 226 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.664 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.019 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.619 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 177 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 128 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 55 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.65 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.779 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.293 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.506 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.048 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 156, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...s residents were not entirely different than the Palean people in using baskets and ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, however, if, may, regarding, so, then, therefore, well, as to, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2475.0 2260.96107784 109% => OK
No of words: 472.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2436440678 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6610686524 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85140213069 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 204.123752495 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506355932203 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 769.5 705.55239521 109% => 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: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.4638104904 57.8364921388 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.75 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 5.70786347227 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.15564705001 0.218282227539 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0457971691555 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0512250269219 0.0701772020484 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0903369514425 0.128457276422 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0259408065236 0.0628817314937 41% => 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: 15.1 14.3799401198 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 98.500998004 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.