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.
The argument concludes the so-called antiquated Palean baskets found in the vicinity of the village with the same name, were not uniquely Palean. The conclusion is based on the premise that archeologists have discovered such baskets in Lithos, another village across a river, a river which is very deep and broad so that the ancient Paleans could have only passed it by boat and no Palean boats have been found around. The reasoning provided for the argument is logically flawed. There are several assumption that have not been taken into account which if true would make the conclusion unacceptable and refuted.
First thing to consider in logic which is true in all fields of science including archeology is that if you cannot find something does not mean that in does not exist or has not existed in the past. Archeologist have not discovered a Palean boat to cross the river. But we should consider the probability that such a boat had existed but waits to be founded somewhere in the future or there have been such a kind of boat but since has been constructed from decomposable material, it has been changed into a part of soil.
Second, the argument should consider other ways of passing the river in the past. Are there parts of the river high up the current or far down which the river narrows or become less deep so people from the villages could wade through the torrent or use simpler forms of transferring equipment to use and pass the river.
Third the argument has not explained in detail that baskets found in Lithus are how much similar to those of Palean. Are they completely the same? Anyway both villages looks to be in the same environmental situation with the same raw sources for craft making and similar needs according to same climate and resources. So Lithus villagers might have made similar baskets to Palean because of similar needs but not exactly the same in structure of shape.
To reach a conclusion, if the argument would consider the aforementioned assumptions and show that there was absolutely impossible ways to pass the river up or down the stream and bring enough evidence to show there has been no doubt for a boat to have been used and how much the two baskets found were similar, the argument would be acceptable. Otherwise it is flawed and easily refuted.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 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: 400 350
No. of Characters: 1874 1500
No. of Different Words: 188 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.472 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.685 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.473 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 117 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 89 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 54 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 16.62 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.594 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.11 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 420, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...no Palean boats have been found around. The reasoning provided for the argument is ...
^^^
Line 1, column 491, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun assumption seems to be countable; consider using: 'several assumptions'.
Suggestion: several assumptions
...argument is logically flawed. There are several assumption that have not been taken into account w...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 499, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'assumptions'?
Suggestion: assumptions
... is logically flawed. There are several assumption that have not been taken into account w...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 554, Rule ID: IF_IS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
... have not been taken into account which if true would make the conclusion unaccept...
^^
Line 9, column 347, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Otherwise,
...ilar, the argument would be acceptable. Otherwise it is flawed and easily refuted.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
anyway, but, first, if, look, second, so, third, thus, kind of, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 11.1786427146 179% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 28.8173652695 52% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 55.5748502994 94% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1911.0 2260.96107784 85% => OK
No of words: 400.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.7775 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.472135955 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51443830706 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 204.123752495 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.4725 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 600.3 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 26.0 22.8473053892 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.1542875051 57.8364921388 156% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.4 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6666666667 23.324526521 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.8 5.70786347227 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233277930138 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0773383173194 0.0743258471296 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.076763385726 0.0701772020484 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12897755985 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.086555744424 0.0628817314937 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.55 48.3550499002 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.74 12.5979740519 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 98.500998004 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.