argument37

happylilywanUID: 2649768

Argument 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 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 this argument, the arguer overturns a viewpoint that a kind of woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern is unique to the Palean People who lived in the prehistorical village called Palea (P). To prove his own thesis, the arguer cites that this kind of baskets have also been found by archaeologists in a nearby village named Lithos (L) which is seperated by a deep and broad river from Palea. Furthermore, no evidence shows that Palean people had boats to cross the river Brim at that time. The arguer also claims that the woods around Palea are full of nuts and berries so that there is no need for them to go across the river to hunt for food. The argument seems reasonable at first glance, but close scrunity reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

To begin with, the arguer makes an assumption that the P people had never been to T on condition that the river Brim is wide and broad and meanwhile the P people had no boats to cross it. However, this might not be the case. Perhaps there is no river at all in the ancient time and the P people can even walk to the T. Without providing sufficient evidence that river Brim is right there from the ancient time till now, I cannot accept the assumption.


Secondly, even I concede that river Brim is the obstacle to the P people to go to the T, the arguer still fails to convince me that the only way to cross the river is by boat. Though there is no boat for them to cross the river, they could entirely possibly choose other transport tools such as a small piece of wood. All in all, there is no evidence indicating that the P people couldn't go to T. On the contray, they can go there by all means.

Thirdly, the arguer concludes that there is no need for the P people to go across to the river Brim just because they had sufficient food--nuts, berries and small game--to eat. Unfortunately, the arguer gives no evidence to show that the P people would go across the river to T to find food only. It is possible that they had gone there just for fun or for exercising. Without ruling these possibilities and giving substantial explanations, the arguer cannot claim that his conclusion is absolutely right.

To sum up, the arguer's conclusion that the basket is not unique to the Palea people is nor well supported as it stands. To bloster it, the arguer must provide more evidence, such as the river Brim is always there and the villagers had no transporting tools to go across the river. Moreover, the arguer would better prove that the P people would go to T for the only reason that they need food, not anything else.