Argument33【0906G 文以载道三月四月作文小组】第1周第1作业 thanks maomao112

perfectattackUID: 2573200

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。1.骨头里某种金属元素含量高不一定是由于人员迁徙造成，可能是由于该地区富含该金属元素或者生产富含该种金属元素的食物
2.金属元素高含量与人员迁徙，只存在相关性，并不存在必然联系及因果关系（计量分析中会舍去没有逻辑关系却有高度相关性的解释变量）
3.即使遗址处富含某金属元素的骨头属于迁徙的人群，该人群也不一定从陶壶生产地迁徙过来，或许是因为该地方贸易（包括陶壶）繁荣或者食品丰富（富含该金属元素的植物）
4.我们不能局限于人员迁徙和贸易来试图解释该现象，是否还有其他可能，比如洪水淹没该地区等。
5.即使陶壶制造者的迁徙在一定程度上导致了该情形，也不能否认贸易没有起到作用，或许该种陶壶在该地区的存在部分原因是人员迁徙，部分原因是贸易

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the distinctively shaped ceramic pots discovered  over a wide area were spread by migration . To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer cites the latest research and discovery that many of the bones found near the pots at a few sites showed high levels of a certain metallic element contained in various foods, which are strongly associated with people who migrated to a new place after childhood.Nevertheless, A careful examination of the argument would reveal how groundless it is.

In the first place, yet no reasonable and necessary explanation of the close relationship between high levels of a certain metallic element and people with migrating experience has been presented. We could not identify whether the logical relationship between them exists. If not, we should ignore the findings, as we delete the high related explaining variable in the regression analysis aiming to find the factors that can succeed in explaining the result if we fail to present the deduction how the explaining variable functions leading to the result we look into according to relevant theory or common sense. Because the phenomena might be a coincidence that has rare explaining ability, or there are other possible alternatives to the high levels of the metallic element in the bones, such as the metallic-element-intense soil, etc.

Even if we could get the evidence to assure that the bones of high levels of certain metallic elements are parts of the emigrants' skeleton, how can we prove that they are the right people who make pots elsewhere and migrate to the place where these pots were found?

In addition, we doubt the wisdom of trying to explain these phenomena only considering two factors--migration and trade. Are there any other possible reasons of this case? Actually it is. We could try to image how the strenuous exercise of the earth's crust changed the world. People suffered the volcanic eruption, landslide and flood, the flourishing "pot city" was merged by flood and tens of thousands of pots flew everywhere and spread with the flood. Then we see the scene now.

Last, on condition that some pots were spread by emigrants, we have no reason to exclude the trade factor, and no evidence indicates us to. Trade is one of the prime motivates in the development of economy at that era when businessmen play a significant role in the commodities transaction and communication of information. They are more likely than the emigrants to leave their home travelling around the world, transporting the commodities including the pots in the motivation of profits. If the motivation of the pot makers to emigrant is obvious, the one of tremendous commercial profits will be definitely greater.

To sum up, the conclusion reached in the argument lacks credibility since the evidence cited in the argument dose not offer strong support to what the arguer claims. To make the argument more convincing, the writer should provide more information concerning the deduction how the high levels of metallic element and migration are associated and avoid false dilemma and hasty generalization to better evaluate the argument, otherwise the argument is logically unaccepted.

[ 本帖最后由 perfectattack 于 2009-1-15 06:39 编辑 ]