- 最后登录
- 2018-8-1
- 在线时间
- 97 小时
- 寄托币
- 172
- 声望
- 67
- 注册时间
- 2017-4-25
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 29
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 148
- UID
- 3806028
- 声望
- 67
- 寄托币
- 172
- 注册时间
- 2017-4-25
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 29
|
发表于 2017-8-25 19:56:16
|显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 youzi42 于 2017-8-25 20:26 编辑
Arg 21 Dr. Field anthropologist
10) Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
Claim: children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents.
Data: Dr. Field's study about Tertian culture using an observation-centered approach
Warrent: his observation
Claim: children in Tertia were reared by their own biological parents.->Dr. Field's conclusion must be invalid.
Data: Dr. Karp's visit to group of islands that includes Tertia using interview-centered method
Warrent: children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village.
Evidence: The children live with their parents.
Question: Does one taking about parents more mean that one lives with their parents?
Evidence: Between 20 years in those islands, their patten of rising child rarely changed.
Question: Does people who live in those islands share the same method of parenting as that in 20 years ago?
Claim: Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method
Data: Dr. Field's study vs Dr. Karp's study
Warrent: Dr. Karp claims that Dr. Field's conclusion must be invalid.
Evidence: more viable methods which can be used to measure the phenomena in Tertia
Question:Are there any other compelling method which can be used to measure the phenomena in Tertia
开头:
When it comes to the evaluation of the best methods in the research of Tertain, Some anthropologists recommend that in order to obtain accurate information in future research, we should be use the interview-centered method. Since the conclusion of the Dr.Karp's research, which was contradicted with that of Dr.Field,using observation-centered approach 20 years ago.Thus, it made the observation-centered approach invalid. However, when judging what's the best method in the research of Tertain practice, we still need to explore more questions. Those questions are mainly concerning with the changes in the islands of Tertain, the validity of the answers given by the Tertain children, and the other viable methods.
To begin with, the conclusion made by Dr.Karp was 20 years later than that of Dr.Field. Thus, we may question that are there any changes , especially in the raising child practice, may existed. Since 20 years is long enough for a tribe to realize their seemingly not pragmatical practice in child-raising. Or, it may happen if the villagers suddenly decided they wanted their custody back. Thus, we have to reconsider the argument ,given the situation what the two experts saw , was totally different. Moreover, we can't come to an conclusion that the interview-centered method was better, given the two research was not comparable.
In addition, we can't evaluate both conclusions merely depends on the focus of those Tertian children's answers. Before further assessment, we need to answer the question: does the focus of the talking mean that those children live with their parents? Since there is possibility that their parents, even not lived with their children, visited their children frequently. As we all know, children tend to talk more about novel things. It not the reason that they did not live with other adults so they told less about other adults, but just that their parents seem more unfamiliar to them. If this assumption holds true, then is may suggest that the child still is raised by the whole village. Thus,the outcomes of Dr.Karp seems uncompelling, what's more, we may focus more on the Dr.Field's observation-centered approach.
However, to judge the two approach, we still need more confirmation. There are only two methods given. Thus, we need to explore the possibility of other situations. Are there any other methods which can explain the practice of the Tertian child-rearing? If there were, then we can't come to an judgment so rashly, given there are uncertainty in the methods. After collecting information that are comprehensive enough, we can make a more accurate decisions on the argument.
In a word, to assess the argument, concerning the Tertian child-rearing practice, we need further investment in the practice. By conforming the changes of the practice, the validity of the methods and the possibility of other useful methods, then we can make a more disinterested assessment.
关于这个argument:
仔细研读了一下老师的以前的帖子, 发现了自已以前很多的误区。 这次写整篇用了差不多45分钟,不包括写提纲的时间,文章废话可能比较多,需要精简。终于写了一个像样一点的argument了,希望老师看到我以前的文章不要对我失望,写的实在太渣了。我会加油的~
修改自己的开头段
argument 2
A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation.The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence).The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring.
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
The role of birth order in an individual's levels of stimulation is explored in a recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys. The study gave some compelling cases related to birth order, the firstborn usually excrete more hormone cortisol than their less experienced peers. Even though the study is so perfect illustrated, however, in those specific situations, there are some explanations which can be used to explain, as followings.
|
|