[YB-1] 7.12argument37 by xxhhtt

xxhhttUID: 2477361

提纲：
开头：conclusion evidence flaw
正文
1.
攻击要有boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo的必要性，小船，或篮子自己漂浮过去，都有可能。
2.
攻击片面，仅有Palea的情况，而无Lithos的情况，很能Lithos有船，Lithos的物质条件不好，Lithos的人要到Palea采集东西，带走Palea的篮子用来装东西
3.
攻击仅仅发现一个篮子就下结论，发现的这一个篮子的不确定性太大了，需要进一步的explore。
结尾
提出建议。
限制一个小时来写的，开头很纠结，写了个长句又觉得表达不清，索性放弃，下几篇换个开头方式。觉得这个argument的错误就在于未排除其他可能性，没有其他好写的东西，不知你有何高见，望指教。
TOPIC:ARGUMENT37 - Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive patternhave previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed tohave been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologistsdiscovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient villageacross the Brim River from Palea. The Brim Riveris very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed itby boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capableof carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands ofyears after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had noneed to cross the river-the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, andsmall game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique toPalea.
WORDS:384
TIME: 01:08:11
DATE: 2009-7-12下午 04:53:48

Inthis argument, the author concludes that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To support this conclusion, he points out that a"Palean" basket was discovered in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. Furthermore, he rules out many possibilities that this basket could be transferred from Palea. At fist glance, this argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but furtherreflection reveals that it omits some substantial concerns that should be addressed in the argument. From the logical perspective, this argument suffers from 3 flaws.
Firstof all, the author cites that boats capable of carry groups of people and cargo were no developed at that time. My question is carrying one basket needs to have such boats? Certainly not, a small boat is enough. Furthermore, a basket which has nothing in it might flow across the river itself.
Secondly,the arguer just tells us some information of the Palea such as that they may have no boat and they would have had no need to cross the river-the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. He ignores another significant  aspect, the Lithos. Perhaps people in Lithos had boats; perhaps because the products in Lithos were not as plentiful as in Palea, they needed to cross theriver to get nuts, berries and so on from Palea. It is highly possible that they took a "Palean basket" to carry those things.
At last, it is necessary to point out that the evidence just one basket discovered in Lithos is highly uncertain. This basket can be carried from Palea by many possible chances. On the other hand, if Lithos also had this kind of basket, we should find some there, not just only one. Further exploration and discovery in Lithos may provide a complete understanding of this "sphinx" basket.
To sumup, this arguer fails to substantiate his claim that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend to strong support to what the arguer maintain. To make the argument more convincing the author would have to provide more information with regard to the circumstance not only in Palea but also in Lithos. Additionally, further exploration in Lithos will help us know more about this basket.

zhongliangokUID: 2659901

开头嘛，我的就是conclusion+evidence+一句不变的话（A examination of it can see how groundless it is）。

我的文章的思路：
因为是考古学上的东西
先考虑是不是一个时间段上的，是不是他们的地质条件没变化
然后假设前面的条件满足然后在考虑他们可能不靠船也有法子过河
然后在批判果子丰富就没必要结果就basket不可能到对岸
你可以参考一下，但我的肯定不是最好的
TOPIC:ARGUMENT37 - Woven baskets characterized by a particulardistinctive patternhave previously been found only in the immediatevicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore werebelieved tohave been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however,archaeologistsdiscovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancientvillageacross the Brim River from Palea. The Brim Riveris very deep andbroad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed itby boat,but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boatscapableof carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed untilthousands ofyears after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover,Paleans would have had noneed to cross the river-the woods around Paleaare full of nuts, berries, andsmall game. It follows that the so-calledPalean baskets were not unique toPalea.
WORDS:384
TIME: 01:08:11
DATE: 2009-7-12下午 04:53:48

Inthis argument, the author concludes that the so-called Palean basketswere not unique to Palea. To support this conclusion, he points outthat a"Palean" basket was discovered in Lithos, an ancient villageacross the Brim River from Palea. Furthermore, he rules out manypossibilities that this basket could be transferred from Palea. At fistglance, this argument appears to be somewhat convincing, butfurtherreflection reveals that it omits some substantial concerns thatshould be addressed in the argument. From the logical perspective, thisargument suffers from 3 flaws.（还行吧，跟我的比起来比较详细）
Firstof all, the author cites that boats capable of carry groups ofpeople and cargo were no（not） developed at that time. My question iscarrying one basket needs to have such boats? （可以改一下）Certainly not, a smallboat is enough. Furthermore, a basket which has nothing in it mightflow across the river itself.
Secondly,the arguer just tells us some information of the Palea such as（不合适）that they may have no boat and they would have had no need to cross theriver-the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game.He ignores another significant  aspect, the Lithos. Perhaps people inLithos had boats; perhaps because the products in Lithos were not asplentiful as in Palea, they needed to cross theriver to get nuts,berries and so on from Palea. It is highly possible that they took a"Palean basket" to carry those things.
At last, it is necessary to point out that the evidence just one basketdiscovered in Lithos is highly uncertain. （这个我觉得不太合适，人家发现一个就足以说明问题了）This basket can be carriedfrom Palea by many possible chances. On the other hand, if Lithos alsohad this kind of basket, we should find some there, not just only one.Further exploration and discovery in Lithos may provide a completeunderstanding of this "sphinx" basket.
To sumup, this arguer fails to substantiate his claim that theso-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, because the evidencecited in the analysis does not lend（lead？） to strong support to what thearguer maintain. To make the argument more convincing the author wouldhave to provide more information with regard to the circumstance notonly in Palea but also in Lithos. Additionally, further exploration inLithos will help us know more about this basket.