Argument33 【0906G 文以载道三月四月小组】第一周第一次作业 by paooozhixia163

paooozhixia163UID: 2588527

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。
论断：
坛子是移民传播的不是贸易。因为研究表明各种食物里某种特定金属的高含量会一直跟随童年后移民到新地方的人，而在一些这样的坛子旁发现了很多骨头里这种金属元素的含量都很高。
论点：
1.论断的前提并不一定成立。这个前提是这些骨头都属于原来童年时居住在一个地方的人，但论者没有提供足够的证据支持这个观点。这种金属物质，是骨头上先前就有的，还是后来腐蚀之后有的。骨科专家有待进一步确定。
2.虽然在一些坛子旁发现了这种金属含量很高的骨头，但没有证据证明这种金属只在某一个地方存在，而在其他地方就没有。如果这种金属在很多地方都有，那么这些骨头就有可能属于不同地方的人。
3.论断武断地排除了贸易这个因素，但正如论者并不能保证坛子旁的骨头都属于一个地方，那不同地方之间进行贸易而使坛子出现在不同地方就不能被排除。
结论：
论者的结论做得很武断不科学。要增强说服力论者还需要提供关于这种金属的分布情况，发现这种骨头的坛子比例有多少，以及这种坛子被发现时的情景如何，以说明坛子边为什么会有这种骨头。
The notion that the pots were spread by migration, not trade, seems at first glance to be an obvious conclusion. After all, it is based on the analysis that the bones, found near the pots showed high levels of the metallic element contained in various foods, which are strongly associated with migrated people. However, the conclusion that contains several facets remaining questionable, I will discuss them in turn.
First of all, the premise that the author provides to support his conclusion is insufficient. He fails to testify that the bones are belonging to people who migrated after childhood. Moreover we won’t agree with the author’s perspective before we make sure that weather the metallic element lay in the bones or the metallic element was created after their host died. During long time’s canker, it is possible that metallic element contained by the bones had taken some inherent diversifications. So the metallic element for evidence is unfound and remains for the specialist’s research and identification.
In addition, even though bones containing high levels of a certainmetallic element are found near the pots, but further analysis should be made to illustrate that the metallic element is existed in the certain exclusive place. If the element had spared everywhere, we can assume that it may belongs to other place rather the sites that the bones are found. However it is a pity that the author has not mentioned at all.
Just as we couldn’t eliminate the possibility that the bones are not only belongs to here, and we also ….

[ 本帖最后由 paooozhixia163 于 2009-1-11 21:39 编辑 ]

gewangUID: 2186573

on paooozhixia163

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=908782&extra=page%3D1