argument37

udoUID: 2114276

【题目】37Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a " Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.

A：河以前也又宽又深吗？地质变迁等影响，也许古代根本就没有这条河或者古代这条河根本就只是一条可以一跃而过的小溪。
B：就算河以前又宽又深，那么P一定就过不去吗？没有有船的证据和没船是完全两码事。有证据没找到或者证据全部都腐败了。就算真没船，P的人也可以架桥或者游泳或者绕路啊。
C：P地方资源丰富不一定能证明P人不想去L啊。首先，人类好奇的天性会驱使P探索新地方，就像哥伦布探索新大陆。P和L只有一河之隔，贸易关系商业关系都有可能促进两岸人们的交流合作。人员交流，友谊婚姻，都是联系。或者战争、疾病、自然灾害，都有可能驱使P地的人到L去。
D：退一万步，就算P和L的人真的不存在任何交流，那么篮子还是可以自己漂过河去的。毕竟生活中充满了各种我们不能排除的特例和巧合。

While the arguer supports kinds of evidences to prove the conclusion that so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, the argument is not well reasoned and need to be examined in the following aspects closely and minutely: the ancient river’s width and depth, the means and the motivations of crossing the river and some special cases.

Firstly, the arguer fails to represent any evidence that the Brim River must also be so deep and broad in ancient age. Absent evidence of supporting this inference, it is just as likely that owing to giant geological change, including earthquake and moving of plates etc, the river had gradually changed from narrow and shallow into the today's style. Perhaps there was no river back in that times that Paleans can walk to Lithos, or even if there was a river back then, the river may not be as broad and deep as it is now.

Secondly, even if the river was broad and deep then, there is no compellent reason to draw the conclusion that the Paleans cannot cross the river. Although the archaeologists haven’t find any evidence that the Paleans had boats, it is necessary to take account of the possibility that the relevant evidences are decayed or buried deeply. It is clear that no evidence of boat does not equal to no boat. Additional, there are many means of crossing the river such as building bridges, swimming and walking around.

Thirdly, even though the Paleans do not have to go across the river for what they already had, it does not necessarily mean that they would not do so. Human beings are always curious about things that they do not know, even back into ancient times. It may be the case that Paleans go across the river simply out of the inherent curiosity of human like Columbus Christopher. Besides, there are abundant causes that forced the Paleans crossed the river such as war, disease, business, and so forth. As is known to all, the relationship between human beings is complex and connection is too tight to be cut by a river.

Moreover, even if Paleans had never reached Lithos, the basket may be brought to the Lithos in other ways. Perhaps the basket was dropped in the river by the Paleans, then floated across the river and found and kept by the Lithos.

In conclusion, the argument can be more convincing if more evidence can be provided. It can be further improved by taking into account more factors that may affect the conclusion.

[ Last edited by udo on 2005-8-4 at 02:56 ]

tomatopotatoUID: 129913

值得大家一看！

xiaolangUID: 179729

论证很流畅啊，不错不错，再添点个人化的模版语言会更好些吧，字数也更有保障。。

matlabUID: 2103237

不错 论证的很好 很流畅 能写这么多已经不易了 结尾再来两句就更好了

udoUID: 2114276

第一次在gter上发帖子，没想到我的那篇作文真的有人看。
真是惊喜交集啊。
非常感谢tomatopotato 、xiaolang 、matlab 的鼓励和建议。
我会继续努力的。

iPodUID: 2105485

我也来看看！

udoUID: 2114276

ipod：
欢迎欢迎啊！