【09GRE作文冲刺组】3.8作业

xiaoyao36UID: 2392780

TOPIC: ARGUMENT37 - 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.
WORDS: 480
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009/3/8 17:15:41

In this argument, the author draws his conclusion that Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, in that 1) there was no evidence that they had boats, 2) large boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed at that time and 3) the Paleans did not have to go cross the river. However, after a careful examination of the inferring procedure, the conclusion is not that convincing.

In the first place, the author considers the lack of evidence that there were boats of Palean as constituting sufficient evidence that the Paleans did not have boats, which is problematic. It is highly possible that the Paleans owned boats at that time. However, as time elapses, the conserved boats were destroyed by some natural disasters. Or perhaps the boats made were destroyed by the Paleans themselves since they broke up the relationship with the Lithosians and set them on fire. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author cannot come to the conclusion whatsoever.

Secondly, the fact that large boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were developed after the Paleans disappeared accomplishes little to the statement that the Paleans were not able to cross the river. There is possibility that the Paleans did not need big boats to cross the river, since they did not have much cargo to bring. Small boats would be enough for them to greet their neighbors and carry the Palean baskets together as the either the presents to show friendliness or the goods to be traded.

What is more, the lack of need to cross the river does not promise that Paleans would not cross the river correspondingly. Perhaps the Paleans were fed up with the nuts and berries; furthermore, the small games could no longer appeal to their appetite. Then it would be reasonable for the Paleans to discover something new to eat. What is more, it is highly possible that the Palean race was an adventurous and brave one, they would like to discover the outside world, and thus the neighbor across the river would probably be the first choice. Either scenario can offer an alternative account for the result.

Last but not the least, since there was only one Palean basket discovered in Lithos, the author should consider the specificity of this evidence. The author overlooks many other possibilities; for example, there was a navigator who brought the basket across the river. Or a flood did it. One single basket is not enough to draw a final conclusion whatsoever.

In general, the author poses an opinion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To strengthen the statement, more investigations and further analyses are required. From my point of view, we should express more concern about the possibility that the Lothos citizens were able to make this kind of baskets, which will make the statement more persuasive and practical.