"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.
Although it is common in experiments, be it science or non-science, to evaluate and compare one or two methods for better accuracy. It is equally important to do the above holistically. The author concluded that the interview-centered method is more efficient than the observation method and thus will establish a greater understanding of the child-rearing culture in other Islands. However, there are some assumptions this author made during his conclusion.
First, the author assumes that because the children talk more about their parents, it nullifies the possibility of the entire village rearing them. Although the frequency of the biological parents' discussion calls for further scrutiny, it is a great error to completely assume that as a deterrence to the former knowledge from Dr. Field. From common knowledge, anybody, be it an adult or a child, tend to talk more about the people they miss. This may in fact, be a factor why the children talk more about their biological parents than any other person residing in the village. This will even support Dr field conclusion further. As a matter of fact, the content of the children's talks will be required to further corroborate the author’s assumption.
Second, the author has committed the fallacy of hasty generalization by assuming that because the interview-based approach worked in Tertia, it will also be efficient in other parts of the island. Again, this is unnecessarily true; we are unsure whether those other groups of children will tell the truth. Likewise, we are unsure whether those in Tertia told the truth. For example, during the 2020 pandemic, countries declared the number of infected people in their countries. It was observed that some countries ballooned their figures while some underreport theirs. The interview has thus failed because the overall information given is inaccurate. While the figures might be true in some countries, it is not in others. It will thus be a massive erring to assume that because the interview-based approach worked in one of the islands, Tertia, it will work in other Islands.
In conclusion, the evidence presented in this case is not sufficient to elicit that conclusion. We can even say that body language observation can be more trusted than word of mouth. At times, children are not disinterested towards matters involving their loved ones. Therefore only their interview method may not be sufficient to explain the culture of childbearing better than the observation approach of Dr. Field.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 879, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... Tertia, it will work in other Islands. In conclusion, the evidence presented in...
^^^
Line 4, column 269, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...rds matters involving their loved ones. Therefore only their interview method may not be ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, likewise, may, second, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2110.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 404.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22277227723 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48327461151 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9703712862 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 4.96107784431 282% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.2382406504 57.8364921388 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.9090909091 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3636363636 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.04545454545 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19536250216 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538853748369 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0411447620628 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113519070906 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0328453103226 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 879, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... Tertia, it will work in other Islands. In conclusion, the evidence presented in...
^^^
Line 4, column 269, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...rds matters involving their loved ones. Therefore only their interview method may not be ...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, likewise, may, second, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 39.0 28.8173652695 135% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 16.3942115768 61% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2110.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 404.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22277227723 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48327461151 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9703712862 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 202.0 204.123752495 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.468620217663 107% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 4.96107784431 282% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.2382406504 57.8364921388 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.9090909091 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3636363636 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.04545454545 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19536250216 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538853748369 0.0743258471296 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0411447620628 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113519070906 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0328453103226 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.3799401198 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => 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.