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.
In the preceding statement the author claims that palean baskets are not uniquely palean because they are found in adjacent villages. Though his claim may seem tenable at first glance, upon close scrutiny we can see that the argument is poorly reasoned, and it is based on several questionable premises and assumptions. Thus, based solely on the evidence the author provides, we can say that the author fails to craft a valid argument.
While the author assumes that the baskets could only have been carried by boats which had not been found, there are other possible scenarios. For example, maybe the river at the time was not as deep and broad as it is now. If the river was shallow and narrow, people in Palea and Lithos could be trading baskets by walking across the river. On the other hand, maybe the weather was extremely cold at the time and the river was frozen during the winter. Again the people from the two villages could simply walk across the river to trade. So we need more information about the geography and climate in the area at the time to assess how likely the scenarios discussed above were.
We also need to know more about the technologies of Palean and Lithoian people at the time for building boats and bridges. Specifically, we want to know whether they were able to build boats and bridges and if they could what materials they used. Maybe they could build boats or bridges to cross the river but the materials they used could not survive the time and left no traces for archaeologists to locate. The absence of any tangible traces of boats or bridges does not necessarily imply no boats or bridges were available then. More information regarding these issues is needed.
Another importance piece of evidence we need is the materials being used to make the baskets. Specifically, we want to know whether the baskets could float in the water. It is possible that some of the baskets had been dumped by Palean people to the river and carried by the water to the other side of the river and then picked up by Lithoian people. To assess how likely this scenario is, we need to know the density of the materials of the baskets along with some other physical characteristics.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds on the issue, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions, and provide evidentiary support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 191, Rule ID: CLOSE_SCRUTINY[1]
Message: Use simply 'scrutiny'.
Suggestion: scrutiny
... may seem tenable at first glance, upon close scrutiny we can see that the argument is poorly ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 191, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...float in the water. It is possible that some of the baskets had been dumped by Palean peopl...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'may', 'regarding', 'so', 'then', 'thus', 'while', 'for example', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.211382113821 0.25644967241 82% => OK
Verbs: 0.176829268293 0.15541462614 114% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0772357723577 0.0836205057962 92% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0569105691057 0.0520304965353 109% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0508130081301 0.0272364105082 187% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.121951219512 0.125424944231 97% => OK
Participles: 0.0406504065041 0.0416121511921 98% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.50794019394 2.79052419416 90% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0325203252033 0.026700313972 122% => OK
Particles: 0.0020325203252 0.001811407834 112% => OK
Determiners: 0.113821138211 0.113004496875 101% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0243902439024 0.0255425247493 95% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.010162601626 0.0127820249294 80% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2642.0 2731.13054187 97% => OK
No of words: 454.0 446.07635468 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.81938325991 6.12365571057 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61598047577 4.57801047555 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.323788546256 0.378187486979 86% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.23127753304 0.287650121315 80% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.140969162996 0.208842608468 68% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0837004405286 0.135150697306 62% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50794019394 2.79052419416 90% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 207.018472906 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482378854626 0.469332199767 103% => OK
Word variations: 54.3457048227 52.1807786196 104% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 21.619047619 23.2022227129 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.044018417 57.7814097925 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.80952381 141.986410481 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.619047619 23.2022227129 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.571428571429 0.724660767414 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.58251231527 56% => OK
Readability: 44.746800923 51.9672348444 86% => OK
Elegance: 1.31428571429 1.8405768891 71% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.409765985134 0.441005458295 93% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.178639154922 0.135418324435 132% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.113598027517 0.0829849096947 137% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.609770482038 0.58762219726 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.148092861659 0.147661913831 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.16864899916 0.193483328276 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0925709660997 0.0970749176394 95% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.365341693681 0.42659136922 86% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0741414789031 0.0774707102158 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258872424206 0.312017818177 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100325325389 0.0698173142475 144% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.87684729064 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.82512315271 187% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 8.0 2.82389162562 283% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 14.657635468 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.