[a习作temp] argument37 第一次限时（超时30秒，字数有点少） [复制链接]

Pluto13003780
UID: 2118087

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 386
注册时间: 2005-7-17
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-7-18 17:05:27 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Argument37  第1篇让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户    共用时间：30分0秒    378 words
从2005年6月18日16时51分到2005年6月18日17时30分
------题目------
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 unique to 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 only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.
------正文------
This argument seems, at first glance, quite reasonable. It concludes that Palean baskets were not unique to Palea because Lithos also had the same baskets and Paleans had not effective ways to spread their basket skills to Lithos. However, I find this argument suffers from sevral severe fallacies as followss.

First, the arguer fails to rule out other possible ways for Paleans to cross the river. It is true that the Brim River is too deep and broad to cross without boats. But this does not lend strong support to the notion that Paleans cannot cross the river. Maybe they can walk to the other side of the river on the ice in the severe winter when the water changed into ice. It is also possible that there lies a land road toward Lithos Village. Hence it is no need to cross the river by boat. There is a reasonalble situation that Paleans spred the basket skills to a nearby village V, which had a accessibe way to Lithos, and then the people of V tought Lithosers that technology.  In a word, it is improper for the arguer to imply that boating is the unique way to the other bank side.

Second, it is still possible that Paleans can invent boats. The arguer mentions that there is no evidence that Paleans had boats. Unfortunately, this does not necessarily mean that Paleans didn't have boats. Paleans are belong to the time of past, therefore no one including archeologists can get to know the real contemporary situation. The evidence that "boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands ofyears after the Palean people disappeared" can not give strong support for the conclusion that Paleans did not have boats. It is totally possible that they had invented boats, which all disappeared in the long river of history.

Finally, enough nuts, berries, and small games do not mean that Paleans won't cross the river. Seeking food for existence is not the only reason why people invent boats. We invent boat sometimes for curiosity and ambition. Perhaps, the Palean people were bored of the small world they had lived for generations. As a result, they invent  a boat, cross the river, spred the technology of woven baskets.

In sum, the author fails to give a successful argument. If he/she wants to make this argument convincable, he/she has to rule out other alternative ways for Paleans to cross the river. The argure also need to correct and improve his/her analogy in order  to make this artical strong.

[ 本帖最后由 yogurt4 于 2006-2-4 02:05 编辑 ]

回应
0

使用道具举报

guesser198414
UID: 2106027

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 323
注册时间: 2005-6-2
精华: 0
帖子: 9

沙发

发表于 2005-7-20 16:38:22 |只看该作者

时态好像有些问题，the Palean的活动应该用过去时比较好吧

This argument seems, at first glance, quite reasonable. It concludes that Palean baskets were not unique to Palea because Lithos also had the same baskets and Paleans had not effective ways to spread their basket skills to Lithos. However, I find this argument suffers from sevral severe fallacies as followss.

First, the arguer fails to rule out other possible ways for Paleans to cross the river. It is true that the Brim River is too deep and broad to cross without boats. But this does not lend strong support to the notion that Paleans cannot cross the river. Maybe they can walk to the other side of the river on the ice in the severe winter when the water changed into ice. It is also possible that there lies a land road toward Lithos Village. Hence it is no need to cross the river by boat. There is a reasonalble situation that Paleans spred the basket skills to a nearby village V, which had a accessibe way to Lithos, and then the people of V tought Lithosers that technology.  In a word, it is improper for the arguer to imply that boating is the unique way to the other bank side.

Second, it is still possible that Paleans can invent boats. The arguer mentions that there is no evidence that Paleans had boats. Unfortunately, this does not necessarily mean that Paleans didn't have boats. Paleans are belong to the time of past, therefore no one including archeologists can get to know the real contemporary situation (你应该是指当时的情况吧contemporary是指现代的情形). The evidence that "boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands ofyears after the Palean people disappeared" can not give strong support for the conclusion that Paleans did not have boats. It is totally possible that they had invented boats, which all disappeared in the long river of history.

Finally, enough nuts, berries, and small games do not mean that Paleans won't cross the river. Seeking food for existence is not the only reason why people invent boats. We invent boat sometimes for curiosity and ambition. Perhaps, the Palean people were bored of the small world they had lived for generations. As a result, they invent  a boat, cross the river, spred the technology of woven baskets.

In sum, the author fails to give a successful argument. If he/she wants to make this argument convincible(convincing), he/she has to rule out other alternative ways for Paleans to cross the river. The arguer(author ?) also need to correct and improve his/her analogy in order  to make this article strong.
我的第一篇argument，欢迎指正
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报