Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than

Surveying culture and life’s type of people in Tertian islands by two anthropologists introduced in the article and one view has mentioned as invalidate by another point of view. the recommendation of researchers to conduct future surveys about child rearing practices of Tertian Islands in interview-centered method which has based on the methodology of Dr. Karp is not compelling and the conclusion of Dr. Karp about invalidity of the results of Dr. Field is not persuasive too, because various questions should be answered to evaluate cogency of the result of Dr. Karp and other researchers.

At the very first step, researchers included Dr. Karp should answer that which kind of questions have been asked from children in Tertia? Do questions related to the rearing practices? Maybe questions were discriminatory and narrowed down to instigate vulnerable feelings in children about the parents who didn’t raise them. Maybe questions were only about biological parents and due to this reason, children had answered questions that weren’t related to adults in the community who reared them. What are observational results of the Dr. Karp investigation? If Dr. Karp has any observational results, are those results in contradiction with Dr. Field conclusions? If so, therefore Dr. Karp reasoning is persuasive, otherwise, it isn’t reliable and should consider profoundly.

The researchers who are supporting the reasoning of the Dr. Karp should ask a question that in what condition do the survey has been done? What are qualifying factors to evaluate the results of the interview as true and perfect? There is a possibility that the survey of Dr. Karp has been done when biological parents of children were presented and children had to answer questions of the interview in the presence of their biological parents. Maybe, children could interview in space which no one is intervening and maybe in such conditions they could provide other answers and weren’t willing to talk about their biological parents.

There are various other questions which can cast doubts on the validity of Dr. Karp researches like the fact that human is willful to find his biological parents throughout the life and rising between other people who aren’t original parents will strengthen this kind of feelings in people. Children’s reliability on their biological parents is more than adults, so there is a probability that they were missed for their biological parents at the moment of the interview. Therefore, Dr. Karp should answer the question that what were the feelings of children at the moment of the interview? Because most of the people will lose their feelings by the passage of the time and there is a possibility that children were sensitive at the interview and after that their idea has been changed toward being in the community of adults who have reared them.

All in all, the argument of researchers to overlook Dr. Field results about rearing practices in Tertia Islands isn’t convincing and their supports of Dr. Karp view and weighting future researches on the methodology of Dr. Karp isn’t persuasive at least without answering to the questions which has asked throughout this passage.

30 minutes
Thank you.