新手求批改

难得沉默vUID：3596023

1) 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 Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

In the argument, the author recommends that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. To support this recommendation the argument point out that a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea, and the Brim River is very deep and broad, besides, there are no Palean boats have been found.  Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, however, it is logically flawed in several critical respects. The reasons are stated as follows.
To begin with, the author assumes that the Brim River is very deep and broad. Although this is entirely possible because it is nowadays, but the author offers no evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption. So it is very likely that the river is not deep or broad, even not existing. The author's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can convince me that the possible is unlikely.
In the second place, the author assumes that because there are no boats have been found, so these baskets were not uniquely Palean. Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that it is necessaries the case, and the author does not supply any evidence to confirm this assumption. It is quite possible that there were boats in that time, we just do not find them. Without accounting for and ruling out the explanation, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.
The last but not least important, even if the evidences turns out to support the foregoing assumptions, the author just simply assumes that these baskets were not uniquely Palean and neither any conclusive scientific evidence nor ant anecdotal evidence is provided to affirm this assumption. It is reasonable to doubt that the author's assumption are not true. It is just as possible that the Palean could go to Lithos by other ways. For example, maybe the river would become glacial in the winter so the Palean can go to the Lithos thorough the glacial river. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must explain either why none of these alternatives is available or why none of them is able to sustain.
To sum up, the author's argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning, neither of which is dispensable for a conclusive argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should reason more convincingly, cite some evidence that is more persuasive, and take every possible consideration into account.

张寄托UID：3647480

加油，以后我也要发文章上来，互勉