[Big Fish]02月26日argument37--By swolf54

swolf54UID: 2421931

TOPIC: ARGUMENT37 - 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.

In the argument, the arguer reaches the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets, which were characterized by a particular distinctive pattern and was considered to be unique to the Palean people, were not unique to Palea anymore. In order to support his assertion, he raised several points and a recent archaeology discovery. However, this argument is fails to make a sound logic due to several false made by the arguer.
In the first place, the arguer states that, recently, this kind of baskets was discovered in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. As the Brim River is very deep and broad, without evidence that Paleans had boats, the arguer infers that Palean people couldn't cross the river; thus, he draws a further conclusion that the undercover basket belongs to Lithos. However, reaching to such a conclusion is little hasty, for he doesn’t provide any evidence to demonstrate that Brim River was deep and broad in the ancient time as today. It is entirely possible that, in ancient times, Brim River was shallow and narrow so that Palea People could get across it easily. Without exclude this possibility, the argument’s reliability shrinks much.
In the second place, even admitting the river was as deep as today, we still find some logical flaws here. The arguer claims that Paleans had not boats, due to boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. But, though the technology of big boat manufacture does not appeared at that ancient time, there still remains possibility that Palea people have mastered skill to build small boat, which can carry one or two passengers. Thus, they could get across the river by this small boat and brought their unique baskets to Lithos. Due to the arguer hasn't rule out this possibility and doesn't provide enough information about the manufacture ability of Palea people. We are still skeptical about his assertions.
At last, the arguer adds that, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river- the woods around Palea are full of nuts, betties, and small game. But, the arguer fails to think that, there might be other reasons, such as trade, marriage or exploration. Besides, in ancient time, Palea district might be different from what it looks today, thus the Paleans still had to go across the river to find food when meet harvest failures.
In conclusion, as the arguer fails to make a sound logic about his assertion, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer must provide more information about the production ability of Paleans and the details of Brim River at that time. Moreover, he needs to find more records about the Paleans in order to reinforce his opinion.

SansouciUID: 2755036

In the argument, the arguer reaches the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets, which were characterized by a particular distinctive pattern and was considered to be unique to the Palean people, were not unique to Palea anymore. In order to support his assertion, he raised several points and a recent archaeology discovery. However, this argument is fails to make a sound logic due to several false made by the arguer.
In the first place, the arguer states that, recently, this kind of baskets was discovered in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. As the Brim River is very deep and broad, without evidence that Paleans had boats, the arguer infers that Palean people couldn't cross the river; thus, he draws a further conclusion that the undercover basket belongs to Lithos.（指出谬误部分可以再精炼些，重点放在解释谬误出亮点） However, reaching to such a conclusion is little hasty, for he doesn’t provide any evidence to demonstrate that Brim River was deep and broad in the ancient time as today. It is entirely possible that, in ancient times, Brim River was shallow and narrow so that Palea People could get across it easily. Without exclude this possibility, the argument’s reliability shrinks much.
In the second place, even admitting the river was as deep as today, we still find some logical flaws here. The arguer claims that Paleans had not boats, due to boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. But, though the technology of big boat manufacture does not appeared at that ancient time, there still remains possibility that Palea people have mastered skill to build small boat, which can carry one or two passengers. Thus, they could get across the river by this small boat and brought their unique baskets to Lithos. Due to the arguer hasn't rule out this possibility and doesn't provide enough information about the manufacture ability of Palea people. We are still skeptical about his assertions.
At last, the arguer adds that, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river- the woods around Palea are full of nuts, betties, and small game. But, the arguer fails to think that, there might be other reasons, such as trade, marriage or exploration. Besides, in ancient time, Palea district might be different from what it looks today, thus the Paleans still had to go across the river to find food when meet harvest failures.
In conclusion, as the arguer fails to make a sound logic about his assertion, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer must provide more information about the production ability of Paleans and the details of Brim River at that time. Moreover, he needs to find more records about the Paleans in order to reinforce his opinion.
全文层层让步，结构清晰，语言再精炼些就很不错。