Argument 1 本人的第一篇习作，求拍砖求指导

水滴石穿kUID: 3250053

Grounding on the discovery of a Palean basket in Lithos, supposing that the river between Palean and Lithos is deep and broad, and then synthesizing the hypothesizes and another factor that ancient people could only cross the river by boat while the evidence shows there is no boat in Palean, the author accordingly suggests that the Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive.

First of all, the argument claims that the river between Palean and Lithos is deep and so if ancient Palean wanted to cross the river they must have boats. But the arguer fails to give the evidence that the river at that time was deep and broad. Maybe the river was very shallow then and becomes deep nowadays. Or perhaps there was no river between the two places at that time. Without evidence that shows the river was deep and broad during that time, I cannot accept the arguer' point.

Second, even assuming that the river was deep and broad during that time, the arguer unfairly indicates that the Palean people had to cross the river in boats. There could be many ways to cross the river. For example, they might be a bridge between them and there was no need for them to have a boat. Or perhaps, the ancient Palean was very and was very good at swimming. Therefore there was no problem for them to swim across the river. Without accounting for all other explanations, the arguer cannot reasonably conclude that the Palean people had to cross the river by boat.

Third, the arguer claims that a Palean basket is found in Lithos, and automatically assumes that the basket was made in Lithos. However, this might not be the case. The arguer obviously overlooks other possible explanations for this phenomenon. For example, the basket may be brought from Palean people. Or maybe it was a coincidence that the basket flowed from Palean to Lithos. Unless the author can demonstrate that the basket was made by local people in Lithos during that time, the author's concern about the issues is unfounded.、

Finally, showing that there is no evidence that the Palean had boats and combining the preview assumptions, arguer draws the conclusion that the basket found in Lithos may prove the planet was not uniquely in Palean. However, no Palean boats were found doesn't mean there were no boats in Palean. Maybe boats do exist in Palean but we have not found or boats made in Palean during that time disappear through the long time.

To sum up.,the arguer's conclusion about the Palean basket was not uniquely Palean is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence, such as the river remains deep and broad as the time passing and the only way from Palean to Lithos is crossing the river by boat. To better assess the problem, I would also need to know that whether the basket found in Lithos is made by the local Lithos people in that time.

SilenthinkerUID: 3156026

楼主是按instructions写的吗？

水滴石穿kUID: 3250053

2# Silenthinker
嗯，是的，这篇要强调evidence，不过自己也是第一篇,估计很多东西写得不完善......

ylhchdUID: 3055726

建议 可以建一个互改小组~

水滴石穿kUID: 3250053

4# ylhchd
我在作文论坛逛力逛没发现最近有批改小组什么的啊，是自己发帖找人成立小组吗？