|
37
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 , 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
Merely based on groundless evidence and dubious assumption,the argued draws a conclusion that the Palean baskets are not unique to Palea. To support the conclusion,the he points out that it is believed that the baskets are unique to P because they are only found there. Additionally,he indicates that the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat as the Brim River is so wide and there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. From the first glance,it seems to somewhat cogent,however,a further reflection reveals that the argument omits so sbustantial concerns that should be addressed to the it. Thus,from my personal perspective,it suffers from three logical flaws.
Firstly,even though the baskets are found only in P, the argued cannot justifiably assert that they are unique in P. There are many possible reasons for this situation:perhaps the unique climate of P plays a significant role in protecting the baskets,while the climates of other regions are not as favorable as the P`s;or perhaps the ancient Ps ever tried hard to protect this valuable antique for a crucial purpose which we have not found yet. Thus,the assertion is unconvincing unless there is compelling evidence to support it.
Secondly. It is unwarranted to claim that the Ps never never went across the B river just based on the evidence that the Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the , and there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. It is entirely possible that the river would had changed in the long period of time,perhaps the river thousands of years ago,was only a creek. Even though the river never changed,the Ps might had went across the river though there is still no evidence that had been found to support the idea.
Finally,maybe the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. However,there are still other motivations that may lead the Ps ship to the other band of the river. For example,the food,the water,or something they need to make fire,to just a few possibilities. Without ruling out possibilities such as these, the conclusion is acceptable.
In sum,the argument fails to substantiate the conclusion that the Palean baskets are not unique to Palea because the evidence cited in the argument does not lend strong support to what the argued maintains. To make the argument more convincing,the argued would have indicated~~~,additionally he would have to demonstrate that ~~. If the argument had concluded the factors discussed above,it would have been more warranted and logically acceptable.
| 
发表于 2010-2-26 10:33:34
转发
签到领寄托币
GO
