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 Paleans boats have been found. Thus it follows that so called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.
The author here states that the woven baskets found only in the immediate vicinity of the village Palea has been recently discovered in the village Lithos, hence the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. Initially we find the argument to be a valid one, but as we look deeper into the matter, we come across many flaws that question the credibility of the argument.
Firstly, the assumption that the woven baskets were made only by the Palean people has not been backed up with any logical evidence. It is possible that these baskets were made by people from another village and the people from Palea bought it and started using it in their village. Just because it was found in Palea first, it doesn’t mean that it didn’t exist elsewhere already. It is also possible that it was initially made by the people from another village and later the people from that village migrated to Palea and got their baskets along with them. Thus the assumption that the woven baskets were made the by the villagers in Palea has not been proved with any solid evidence and hence it might not be true.
Secondly, it is stated that the village Lithos is across the Brim River from Palea which is very deep and broad and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat and no Palean boats were found. Here in this argument, they have ignored the possibility of people travelling from Lithos to Palea using the boats from Lithos. It is possible that the people from Lithos had travelled to Palean and found the woven baskets there. The villagers of Lithos might have bought it from Palea and took it with them to Lithos. It is also possible that the baskets were made by the people from Lithos and they travelled to Palea by boat and brought their baskets along with them.
Furthermore, it has been assumed that there is only one mode of transport to get from Palea to Lithos. The argument states about crossing the river using a boat but it hasn’t considered the probability of there existing another mode of transport to reach Lithos. It is quite possible that one can go from Palea to Lithos by road or by any other mode of transport. Hence there is a good enough probability that the villagers from Palea travelled to Lithos using a mode of transport other than boat. They might have carried their woven baskets with them to Lithos and that’s how the baskets were discovered in Lithos.
Thus due to the overstated flaws, the argument seems to be ill-founded. However, the argument would have been strengthened if the author would have backed up the assumptions with solid evidence. Thus in such a scenario, the authenticity of the argument based on the data mentioned, falls flat.
- As people reply more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 58
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 75
- 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 50
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 477 350
No. of Characters: 2175 1500
No. of Different Words: 168 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.673 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.56 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.239 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 133 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 90 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 56 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.85 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.725 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.389 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.613 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.172 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 570, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... and got their baskets along with them. Thus the assumption that the woven baskets w...
^^^^
Line 7, column 370, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...road or by any other mode of transport. Hence there is a good enough probability that...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e baskets were discovered in Lithos. Thus due to the overstated flaws, the argume...
^^^^
Line 9, column 138, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had backed'?
Suggestion: had backed
...ld have been strengthened if the author would have backed up the assumptions with solid evidence....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 196, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...up the assumptions with solid evidence. Thus in such a scenario, the authenticity of...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.9520958084 54% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 13.6137724551 118% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 28.8173652695 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2248.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 474.0 441.139720559 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74261603376 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66599839874 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37544123773 2.78398813304 85% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.367088607595 0.468620217663 78% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 706.5 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.4521027447 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.4 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.9 5.70786347227 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.286742935808 0.218282227539 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108787336674 0.0743258471296 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0909284701808 0.0701772020484 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176039217313 0.128457276422 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0543560032601 0.0628817314937 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.18 8.32208582834 86% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.