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

gjwUID: 2512308

===============第一次作业===============
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。
outline:  the association may also lie in other non-migration factor.
            the bones' age cannot be identified.

Merely based on unfounded assumption and dubious evidence, the statement draws a conclusion that the pots were spread by migration, not trade. To substantiate the conclusion the arguer points out the evidence that high levels of a certain metallic element contained in various foods are strongly associated with people who migrated to a new place after childhood. In addition, he indicates that many of the bones found near the pots at a few sites showed high levels of the metallic element. At first glance, the author’s argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection reveals that it omits some substantial concerns that should be addressed to substantitate the argument. In my point of view, this argument suffers from logical flaws.

Although arguer maintains that there must exist a strong association between the pot maker and their daily food which contained a high level of a certain kind of metallic element, he fails to give the detailed information about what the association is concretely. Even if these two factors are related to each other closely, there also could be various possibilities. For instance, the prehistoric tribes may not only have high civilizations of handicrafts including distinctively ceramic shaped pots, they could also be specific in cultivating various vegetables or raising certain kind of domesticated animals, which are widely accepted by other prehistoric communities. Thus their unique agriculture goods could lead to the probability that the certain metallic element is no longer only related to the original owners.

Moreover, whether the high level of the metallic etement founded in the skeletons belongs to only one prehistoric people is still suspicious. As we all know, prehistoric people suffering from a harsh life imgrated very often. It is not reasonable to define the bones as the remains of the one permanent tribe in that area. So the conclusion should be drawn uder the hypothesis that the residents in the prehistory period were never changed. However, without the solid identification of the precondition, the subsequence is meaningless.

Overall, the reasoning behind the conclusion is not so convincing. Therefore, before reaching any final conclusion, the arguer should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for the ceramic pots spreading.

[ 本帖最后由 gjw 于 2009-1-13 14:04 编辑 ]