The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
"Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation- centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
According to the article by Dr. Karp, his interview-centered method is more accurate than the observation-centered method by Dr. Field to understand the child rearing traditions in Tertia. He makes his claim based on the outcomes of his recent interviews with the children from a group of islands. Although the claim sounds fit to the context at a first glance, there are three unwarranted assumptions behind the position of the writer which need to be further examined to accept his recommendation.
To begin, the conclusion of Dr. Field was solely based on the observations from the children of Tertia. However, Dr. Karp reaches to his conclusion after interviewing a group of islands including Tertia. It may be possible that Dr. Field observed all the Tertian children during his experimentation and then made this conclusion. On the other hand, Dr. Karp just interviews a small group of Tertian children along with other children from different islands and assumes that the overall population will follow the same. Nonetheless, if Dr. Karp interviews all the children of Tertia, probably, he will get same findings like Dr. Field. If any of the preceding circumstances becomes true, the argument will hold no water and thus can't be accepted.
Secondly, Dr. Karp assumes that children state the actual facts during the interview. But it may be forged. Perhaps, the biological parents were concerned about the interviews and they taught their children what to say in the interview. Besides, the interviewer may ask those questions which are only related to the children's biological parents. For example, if they are asked "who prepare your food", or "with whom do you sleep at night", they have to give the answers related to their parents. If any of the aforementioned point becomes valid, the recommendation of the author would be seriously weakened.
Finally, Dr. Karp assumes that his interview-centered method can predict cultures of other island groups more accurately. Even if it holds true for the Tertia island, there is no guarantee that similar outcomes can be obtained from other islands as well. The cultural traits of the surrounding island groups may be completely different and parents don't allow their children to respond to the strangers. It also be possible that child rearing culture has long been studied by the anthropologists during the past 20 years and many sophisticated methods have been discovered to understand the culture of different island groups. If any of the above criteria is true, the interview-centered method will no longer be followed.
To conclude, without further explanations of the assumptions that the author made, we can't vie with the conclusion.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 436 350
No. of Characters: 2216 1500
No. of Different Words: 214 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.57 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.083 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.012 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 157 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 121 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 81 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.762 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.975 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.762 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.319 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.522 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 729, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...he argument will hold no water and thus cant be accepted. Secondly, Dr. Karp assu...
^^^^
Line 5, column 52, Rule ID: ACTUAL_EXPERIENCE[1]
Message: Use simply 'facts'.
Suggestion: facts
...r. Karp assumes that children state the actual facts during the interview. But it may be for...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 349, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...may be completely different and parents dont allow their children to respond to the ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 412, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...en to respond to the strangers. It also be possible that child rearing culture has...
^^
Line 9, column 87, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...he assumptions that the author made, we cant vie with the conclusion.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, finally, first, however, if, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, then, thus, well, for example, on the other hand
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 : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 28.8173652695 108% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 16.3942115768 43% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2293.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 435.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27126436782 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11469736491 2.78398813304 112% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 204.123752495 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505747126437 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 675.9 705.55239521 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2313029795 57.8364921388 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.19047619 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7142857143 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.52380952381 5.70786347227 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.23735799543 0.218282227539 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.08035137651 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0762092543566 0.0701772020484 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124324773416 0.128457276422 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0943207927077 0.0628817314937 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.3799401198 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.