Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archaeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands-on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could be used only for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this discovery, collectors predict that the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.
The argument claims that the discovery of molds will decrease the value of life-size sculptures and will increase the value of miniatures. Stated in this way, there are some questions that can be raised and need to be answered to evaluate the conclusion of the argument. Without answering that questions, the argument is weak and unconvincing. The proper reasoning and pursuassiveness of the argument depend on these question's proper solutions.
Firstly, the argument readily said that archeologists discovered the molds on kali and they concluded that these were used by Kalinese artists. How can they be sure that these were available at that time? So, a question would be raised about the exact time interval when molds were used among Kalinese artists. The molds which have been discovered could be used among predecessors or followers of Kaliness artists. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that whether these molds were actually available at that ancient time of Kaliness artists by carbon-dating experiments.
Secondly, the argument conveyed the fact that archeologists concluded that kalinese artists did not use sculpting tools and techniques. Because they did not find any of these tools on kali's soil. Any natural disaster could happen and destroy these tools and techniques or can be damaged over time or can be plundered or stolen by another ancient nation other than the kalinese. So, a question can be raised about the proper conservation of these tools and techniques. The prediction could have been more convincing if the argument had provided the information that there were no natural disasters or plundering incidents that could damage any ancient tools.
Thirdly, the argument again conveyed the fact that molds can be used for only life-sized sculptures. Were there any kinds of miniatures molds that could be used to create statues? If its answer is yes, then the value of miniatures will also decrease. So, strengthening the reasoning behind the prediction it is essential to answer this question convincingly.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed and not persuasive without answering the above-mentioned questions. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts that the preciseness of the discovery, diversified use of molds in big or small-sized statues, etc. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation or decision, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors, otherwise, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 406 350
No. of Characters: 2125 1500
No. of Different Words: 184 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.489 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.234 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.909 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 150 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 99 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 65 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.3 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.234 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.55 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.569 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.12 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 137, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...not use sculpting tools and techniques. Because they did not find any of these tools on...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2182.0 2260.96107784 97% => OK
No of words: 406.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37438423645 5.12650576532 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98008385846 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.463054187192 0.468620217663 99% => OK
syllable_count: 672.3 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.8191123793 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.904761905 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.70786347227 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13608613913 0.218282227539 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0473197839596 0.0743258471296 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0443468779474 0.0701772020484 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0796104604217 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0489485132243 0.0628817314937 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.3799401198 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.5979740519 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.