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, archa

Essay topics:

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 given argument concludes that so-called Palean baskets, which have been recently discovered nearby Palea in the Lithos village, were not uniquely Palean. According to the given evidence, this argument sounds logically on the face of it, but on the other hand, many additional evidences are required to appropriate assess the validity of this argument.

Initially, the argument points out that any Palean boats have not been found, thus people from Palea could not cross the river. However, the author claims to hastily that the Palean people had no boats. It is unclear that maybe these archaeologists are still exploring that location with the aim to find these boats. It also can be said that even if none of boats will not be found, it doesn’t mean that the Palean people could not cross the river. Perhaps, at that time they might not have necessary skills and knowledge to build a boat. There might be another evidence of their ability to cross the river, for example, huge parts of trees, the remains of axes and ropes. Besides, without other additional findings, it is possible to claim that people from Palea could communicate with people from Lithos.

The author also says that the Brim River is very deep and broad, that is why people could not cross it without the aid of boats. There is no evidence supporting the fact that this river was the same in the prehistoric time. There is high probability that due to different reasons the river could be smaller and shallower. In order if the Brim River was not big as nowadays, people from Palea could easily cross it. For instance, they might swim across the river.

Ultimately, if people had no chance to cross it, the author didn't take into account such variant as trade at that time. It can be assumed that people in Palea had trade connections with other any tribe, and this tribe could buy these Palean baskets buy the Palean people. In its turn, people from another tribe could have an opportunity cross this river and sold the Palean baskets in the Lithos village.

In conclusion, it is necessary to have other additional evidences to get a complete understanding of strengths and weaknesses of the article. In this case, it would be great to give more information about researchers in that area and also things found by archaeologists there. The useful information would be data about the Brim River, and how it has changed since the prehistoric time. Also it is important to give information about the opportunity of trade in Palea. Without additional evidence, however, one should be especially wary about accepting the truth of the argument’s conclusion.

Votes
Average: 5 (3 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2023-08-09 M1randa 55 view
2023-08-06 yuktapradeep 55 view
2023-07-30 Vivi5428 66 view
2023-07-30 Vivi5428 68 view
2023-07-09 ZHOU0444 16 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user ajulyav :

Comments

----------------
argument 1 -- not OK. we have to accept 'no Palean boats have been found.', but people from villages may have boats.

argument 2 -- OK

argument 3 -- OK
----------------

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 450 350
No. of Characters: 2126 1500
No. of Different Words: 198 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.606 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.724 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.422 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 124 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 61 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.455 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.366 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.077 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5