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

yuzhirenzheUID: 2520772

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。

提纲:  
1 元素含量高，不一定是决定是否发生移民的唯一标准。还需要考虑其它因素。
2 就算成立，也只能说明有移民，但无法说明移民一定会带进来壶。
3 即使承认移民是让壶流入的主要手段，不能借此直接说不会由贸易传进来

We can know from this argument that, the writer want to give an reasonable answer to the spreading of the pots, which focus on the migration, by using the analysis of high levels of a certain metallic element contained in various foods are strongly associated with people who migrated to a new place after childhood. Although the writer analysis this with a hard work, we can not get a perfect support to this idea yet.

First and foremost, as mentioned in the argument, the analysis about the levels of metallic element associated with people who migrated to a new place need more examples to make it reliable. The high levels of the metallic element may be a signal to establish the migration, but not the only one. Only with the high levels of the metallic element in the bones can not stand for any other things. Without discussing more about the other significant information, no perfect conclusion could be found out.

Also, even if we had accept the conclusion that the high levels of the metallic element in the bones found near the pots can show that migration occurring often, that the migration could bring pots to this region still suffers from several flaws. Maybe buying new pots is easier for them to migration, so there is no evidence show that they should bring the pot into the place instead pf using the local ones.

Finally, last but not least, there is absolutely no proof provided that the migration could be the only way to spread the pots; even we consider the migration is an important way. All over the article, we can only find the discussion about the migration, while no word about the trade. There is insufficient substantiation to tell us that why trade cannot make any influence on the spreading of the pots.

In sum, the argument relies on that migration can be the only way to spread the pots may be unsubstantiated. Only if the superintendent had proof of the association between the high levels of the metallic element and migration more better, and tell me why trade cannot be a reason, could I accepted the argument well.