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 childr

This argument is about the survey conducted by Dr. Field twenty years ago and Dr. Karp recently on the children of Tertia. According to Dr. Karp, Dr. Field observation that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents is not convincing. Furthermore, Dr. Karp and his team of graduate student who conducted survey in Tertia found that children spend much more time talking about their biological parents. Hence, Dr.Karp is suggesting that the interview-centered approach is better than observation-centered approach.However, in order to fully critique this argument, we need to have a significant amount of additional details.

The first piece of evidence is that Dr. Field observation was done twenty years ago as compared to Dr. Karp observation. Twenty years is a very long time. So many changes can happen during this twenty years. When Dr. Field surveyed, it may be possible that during that time the entire village were to be counted as a family. Now there might be the change in the living in the village of Tertia. Children are mostly living with their parents and are no longer in contact with other residents of the village so often as they used to be twenty years ago.

Another piece of evidence that might help us judge is that Dr. Karp has not provided the details of interview questions. It might be possible that he and his team of graduate students were more inclined towards asking questions about their biological parents. They might not have asked the children about citizens of the village or there were very few questions on other individuals as compared to their parents.

One problem with this argument is that the number of survey conducted. He has not provided the details of the number of the children being surveyed. If the number of children surveyed is less, then his study and observation is not vaild in critisizing Dr. Field's observation. Also, there is no evidence of which part of the village was surveyed. Did it included the whole village or only some part ? Clearly, we need to take these questions into account before concluding the claims.

The author has not offered convincing evidence to support his views. He should have strengthened his argumentby providing concrete details on why Dr. Field observation is invalid. To conclude whether Dr. Karp is correct, different questions relating the relevant evidence is required. The author has to work towards making his assumption logically more correct.