Argument33【0906G 文以载道三月四月小组】第一周第一次作业 by115463

115463UID: 2543341

Argument 33
The following report appeared in an archaeology journal.
'The discovery of distinctively shaped ceramic pots at various prehistoric sites scattered over a wide area has led archaeologists to ask how the pots were spread. Some believe the pot makers migrated to the various sites and carried the pots along with them; others believe the pots were spread by trade and their makers remained in one place. Now, analysis of the bones of prehistoric human skeletons can settle the debate: high levels of a certain metallic element contained in various foods are strongly associated with people who migrated to a new place after childhood. Many of the bones found near the pots at a few sites showed high levels of the metallic element. Therefore, it must be that the pots were spread by migration, not trade.'
在广泛区域分散分布的很多史前遗迹发现的形状独特的陶壶导致考古学家提出疑问：这些壶是如何流传的？有些人相信壶的制造者迁移到别的地方并把壶随之带来；另一些人相信壶是通过贸易流传的，而他们的制造者留在一个地方。现在，对于史前人类骨骼的分析可以解决这个争论: 在多种食物中都含有的某种金属元素的高含量与那些成年后移居到新地方的人有很高的关联性。在一些遗迹的壶附近发现的很多骨头都显示出这种金属元素的高含量。因此，这些壶肯定是通过迁徙而不是贸易来流传的。

提纲:
1.骨头里含的金属物质是否当地独有？是独有的也有可能是贸易得来的
2.只有地点重合，没有时间证据，也许罐子通过贸易先到，人后来迁移
3.为什么有些骨头旁有罐子，有些没有？也许贸易得来的


In this argument, the author makes a conclusion that the ceramic pots must be spread by migration but not trade. To support this opinion the author cites the analysis of the bones of prehistoric human skeletons and the report that many of the bones found near the pots at a few sites showed high levels of certain metallic element. And these certain metallic element contained in various foods and will strongly associated with people who migrated to a new place after childhood. However, these evidences provide little credible support for the arguer's conclusion.

First of all, the author fails to establish the association between the bones, which contain high level of the certain metallic element, and the migration of the prehistory human. It is possible that the metallic element contained in various foods is a very common element, like iron or copper, which may not make any differences in the food between local dwellers and migrant dwellers. And even if the certain element was not local at that time, there still exists possibility that these food might brought there by trade.

Secondly, even though the bones which contain high level of metallic element have something to do with the migration, the author still has no sufficient evidence to confirm that the pots were brought by them. It is possible that the pots were brought there by trade at first, and people did not begin to migrate there until later. For no information about the exact age of the bones and the pots is provided by the author.

The last but not the least, the bones which contain high level of metallic element are only found in several places where the pots are found. So, even though author can confirm that there is a correlation between the bones and the pots, then, how about the pots without any such bones found near them? In these places the pots may spread by trade but not migration.

To sum up, the author’s conclusion is unconvincing as it stands. In order to support his conclusion, the arguer must provide sufficient evidences to prove there indeed exists a relationship between the metallic elements which contained in different foods and the people who migrated to a new place when they grew up. And a study about the history of the migration of the pot-makers is also quit important.

[ 本帖最后由 115463 于 2009-1-12 01:50 编辑 ]

liuguaguaUID: 2569375

on 115463
Argument33
        [url=http://[url=bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=908887&extra=page%3D1[/url]http://[url=bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=908887&extra=page%3D1[/url[/url]]

[ 本帖最后由 liuguagua 于 2009-1-12 21:24 编辑 ]