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 argument above comes to the conclusion that with the discovery of similar structure of baskets in the Lithos region that the 'Palean' baskets were not as unique as previously thought. The reason stated for the same is - the nature of the Brim River made it possible to cross it only by a boat, and Palean boats were not found in the Lithos village.
Although this might seem to be a premise from which the conclusion can be drawn, it in itself is inadequate to prove the same. There are several other factors and theories that must be evaluated to predict the accuracy of the inference from the passage. Firstly, the village of Palea should also not have any traces of boats. Presence of Palean boats in the village of Palea would serve as a tool to weaken the inference drawn by the passage, as it is very much possible for Paleans to travel to and fro between the villages with the help of the boat. It is also important to study the residents of Palea, their primary occupation, the most prominent leisure activities, etc. as they would also help in determining the possibility of them crossing the river without the help of the boat. For example, if the primary leisure activity turns out to be swimming or if fishing was one of the prominent occupations of the people of Palea, then they might have been excellent swimmers and capable of swimming for long duration of time. Moreover, the availability of the raw materials that were used to make these baskets in the village of Lithos must also be confirmed. The absence of these materials in Lithos and their abundance in Paleo would further question the conclusion stated in the argument.
Therefore, other possible explanations for the presence of these baskets in Lithos such as that stated above should be investigated. The conclusions that are interpreted from these explanations should also question the uniqueness of the baskets, only then can it be accurately concluded that the Palean baskets were not regional to the village of Palea.
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: 12 15
No. of Words: 346 350
No. of Characters: 1628 1500
No. of Different Words: 153 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.313 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.705 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.519 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 111 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 55 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 28.833 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.468 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.39 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.528 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.124 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, moreover, so, then, therefore, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1668.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 346.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.82080924855 5.12650576532 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58939450734 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 204.123752495 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.459537572254 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 533.7 705.55239521 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => 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: 48.4829012743 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.307692308 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.6153846154 23.324526521 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.92307692308 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.172666647763 0.218282227539 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0629694098401 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0552616194352 0.0701772020484 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131946286742 0.128457276422 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0266324204839 0.0628817314937 42% => 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: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => 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: 10.97 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.17 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.1389221557 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
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.