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 rat

At first glance, Dr. Karp's assertion that children in the island of Tertia are actually raised by their biological parents rather than the entire village sounds logical. Following his logic, even his denial toward observation-method research could be agreed. However, Further evidence and information are needed to justly evaluate the validity of Dr. Karp's claims. Without further supporting details, arguer's article would end up being less logical than it seemed at first.

The time gap between the research of Dr. Field and that of Dr. Karp's is a considerable factor. The famous anthropologist Dr. Field conducted his studies on the island of Tertia twenty years ago and Dr. Karp did recently. The given article does not guarantee whether the condition of the island is the same as twenty years ago. Possibly, westerners could have immigrated to the island and implemented western-style family culture which biological parents are eligible for raising their own children. If that is the case, Dr. Karp's argument lose its strength because those two anthropologists are practically comparing two different islands due to the time difference. Therefore, the arguer should suggest an evidence showing the environmental, social, and cultural status of the island is the same as two decades ago.

Moreover, Dr. Karp needs to show that he actually interviewed the children of the island of Tertia. In the given article, the argue merely said that he interviewed "children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia". Still, the research of Dr. Field was on people residing in Tertia island. If the arguer did not or failed to interview residents of Tertia island, his argument contains a severe logical hole in it because the cultures of surrounding islands could be different from that of Tertia.

Additionally, the arguer's denial toward the observation-based research is not being supported strongly since he only has one case of discrepancy between interview-based and observation-based research. Supposing Dr. Karp's research is actually comparable to that of Dr. Field and is more valid, Dr. Karp is only mentioning a single case. Generally, changing a paradigm of research methodology requires numerous supporting examples and research solely dedicated to comparing pros and cons of the different methodologies. However, Dr. Karp is trying to convert the paradigm with a single supporting case, which is an excessive generalization. Therefore, he needs more research showing interview-based research is superior to observation-based method.

It is possible that the Dr. Field erroneously concluded that the residents of Tertia raise their offsprings as a whole. This is because understanding a different culture is challenging due to many obstacles such as the use of unknown language, limited time of research, and inherent cultural stereotypes. However, Dr. Karps currently has weak argument because he is not successfully suggesting the required evidence.