Argument56 [Smile－A组]第二次作业

geniuschenUID: 2131745

TOPIC: ARGUMENT56 - Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how the Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this development, collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value.


Outline:
1.The arguer unfairly assumes that the ancient Kalinese artists did not use tools and techniques in the sculpting process.
2.The mere facts that molds could only be used for life-size sculpture says little about the reason why Kalinese miniature were different from the life-size ones and why sculpting tools were seldom found on Kali Island.
3.I would like to point out the author's poor prediction in the value change of both the life-size sculptures and miniatures.

In this argument, the arguer claims that the value of the life-size sculptures made on Kali would decrease while the value of the Kalinese miniatures would increase. To support the argument, the arguer cites a discovery of molds of human heads as well as hands on Kali to assert that Kalinese artists used not tools and techniques but molds in sculpting process. Besides, the arguer also suggested that this discovery would explain the difference between the two style sculptures and why few tools were founded on Kali. However, I think this argument has some logical flaws in several aspects.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that the ancient Kalinese artists did not use tools and techniques in the sculpting process. In fact, no evidence is provided to support that Kalinese used such molds of actual bodies in creating the life-size sculptures rather than other works of art. Admittedly that the molds were used in sculpturing, the proportion of the artists who would use these molds is still missing so that it is entirely possible that only a small group of the artists used these molds while major ones used mainly sculpting tools and techniques. Furthermore, even if many of the artists used molds of actual bodies, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that they also used sculpting tools and techniques to create these statues. Hence, the discovery does not necessarily indicate that ancient Kalinese artists never used tools and techniques.

Secondly, even if the molds were used by artists the mere facts that molds could only be used for life-size sculpture says little about the reason why Kalinese miniature were different from the life-size ones and why sculpting tools were seldom found on Kali Island. For one thing, we are not informed with whether the creators of the two types of sculptures are the same artists and perhaps the differences in style are due to the respective particular way of distinct artists in making sculptures. For another thing, maybe the fact that rare tools were found is because the archeologists do not have the suitable equipment, not the explanation offered by the arguer in the argument. Thus without ruling out the possibilities I requested above, the arguer's conclusion is open to doubt.

Finally, I would like to point out the author's poor prediction in the value change of both the life-size sculptures and miniatures. Actually, the arguer fails to convince us that the life-size sculptures made by using molds are valueless or the collectors will pay more attention to the abstracted statues than before. What is more, there are many other factors that would have an impact on the value of such works of art, for instance the quality or the number of the sculptures unearthed on Kali Island. Therefore the arguer's expectation that the life-size sculptures would decrease in value and the miniatures would be more valuable than before is ungrounded.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the arguer should show us the detailed information about the molds discovered on the Kali Island. What is more, the arguer should also rule out other factors that would contribute to the different styles of the life-size sculptures as well as the miniatures and get rid of other possibilities that would influence the value of the sculptures.

大家拍 呵呵

xinxinwUID: 2144273

In this argument, the arguer claims that the value of the life-size sculptures made on Kali would decrease while the value of the Kalinese miniatures would increase. To support the argument, the arguer cites a discovery of molds of human heads as well as hands on Kali to assert that Kalinese artists used not tools and techniques but molds in sculpting process. Besides, the arguer also suggested that this discovery would explain the difference between the two style sculptures and why few tools were founded on Kali. However, I think this argument has some logical flaws in several aspects.作为开头段长了点

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that the ancient Kalinese artists did not use tools and techniques in the sculpting process. In fact, no evidence is provided to support that Kalinese used such molds of actual bodies in creating the life-size sculptures rather than other works of art. Admittedly that the molds were used in sculpturing, the proportion of the artists who would use these molds is still missing so that it is entirely possible that only a small group of the artists used these molds while major ones used mainly sculpting tools and techniques. Furthermore, even if many of the artists used molds of actual bodies, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that they also used sculpting tools and techniques to create these statues. Hence, the discovery does not necessarily indicate that ancient Kalinese artists never used tools and techniques.

Secondly, even if the molds were used by artists the mere facts that molds could only be used for life-size sculpture says little about the reason why Kalinese miniature were different from the life-size ones and why sculpting tools were seldom found on Kali Island. For one thing, we are not informed with whether the creators of the two types of sculptures are the same artists and perhaps the differences in style are due to the respective particular way of distinct artists in making sculptures. For another thing, maybe the fact that rare tools were found is because the archeologists do not have the suitable equipment, not the explanation offered by the arguer in the argument. Thus without ruling out the possibilities I requested above, the arguer's conclusion is open to doubt.

Finally, I would like to point out the author's poor prediction in the value change of both the life-size sculptures and miniatures. Actually, the arguer fails to convince us that the life-size sculptures made by using molds are valueless or the collectors will pay more attention to the abstracted statues than before. What is more, there are many other factors that would have an impact on the value of such works of art, for instance the quality or the number of the sculptures unearthed on Kali Island. Therefore the arguer's expectation that the life-size sculptures would decrease in value and the miniatures would be more valuable than before is ungrounded.

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the arguer should show us the detailed information about the molds discovered on the Kali Island. What is more, the arguer should also rule out other factors that would contribute to the different styles of the life-size sculptures as well as the miniatures and get rid of other possibilities that would influence the value of the sculptures.
已经比较成形了