Phoenix小组组员1号习作argument37

Jane114UID: 2681579

The argument claims that Palean basketswere not unique to Palea. To support this view point, the arguer indicates thatarchaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, which isan ancient village across the Brim River from Palea.However, a close analysis reveals several logical fallacies hidden in thisargument.

First of all, the arguer states that the Brim Riveris very deep and broad, so the only way for Paleans to cross the river isboating, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. Clearly, it isnot reasonable. Maybe the evidence does exist, only our archaeologists have notfound it yet. Even if it is a fact that Paleans had no boats, the Brim Rivercould possibly be sallow and narrow, or even not existed in Palean time. Whatis more, even if the river was indeed very deep and broad at that time, thewoven baskets may also arrive at the Lithos by other means, such as driftingacross the river accidentally. Unless the previously-mentioned possibilitiescould be ruled out, the deduction could not be tenable.

Secondly, the arguer claims that boatscapable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed untilthousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. But this does notmatter, because such kind of large boats are not necessary for one people carryingone basket to cross a river, a smaller one, such as a canoe is just enough.Thus this reason is not useful.

Lastly, the arguer states that the Paleanis rich in natural resources, so Paleans would have had no need to cross theriver. Of course, it is not convincing, for abundant resources in Paleancurrently does not indicate that those resources also existed at that time.Even though it is true that such resources were abundant in palean time, it cannot automatically be concluded that Paleans would have had no need to cross theriver, maybe they wanted an adventure, or wanted a larger domain.

All in all, the arguer draws his or herconclusion too hasty. As mentioned above, causes of the Palean basket exists inLithos is multiple, we could not conclude the Palean baskets were not unique toPalea only through the archaeologists discovered such a "Palean"basket in Lithos. To better support the arguer's conclusion, the argumentshould provide further information and statistics. Only with theseimprovements, can this argument be accepted by the readers.