Argument37 有点迟,欢迎拍必回拍

MIMOSARLUID: 2112846

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.


In this argument the author claims that the founding of a "Palean" basket in Lithos can prove that the Palean baskets are not unique in Palean. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer points out that the Brim river which between the two countries is too deep to cross without a boat and there is no evidence can prove the Paleans had boats. In addition, the boat which can carry cargo and groups of peoples was not developed at that time. Furthermore, the Paleas need not to cross the river because there are full of fruits, nuts and small game in their place. The line of reasoning is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.

To start with, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the Paleans crossed the river. Though still now there is no evidence can prove that the Paleans have boat, it do not mean to there will be no any evidence can be found in the future. It is possible that the evidences were embedded by the earthquake happened thousands of years ago. Another flaw is that the arguer takes a assumption that it is beacuse the Paleans had no big boat which can carry groups people and cargo that they cannot across the Brim river. Without the big boat, the Paleans can cross the river buy other kinds of boat such as raft. Even if we granted that the Paleans had no any boat, there still other ways they can across the river. For example, there was a cordage bridge between each side of the river, people can easily across the river by it. The arguer commits a fallacy of unwarranted assumption to assume that no big boat there is no way to across the deep and broad Brim river.

Similarly, the arguer oversimplifies the reasons why the Paleans should across the river to arrive in the Lithos though they had all kinds of nuts, fruits and small game in their place. The exploration is the nature ability to human being. The paleans maybe so curious to another side of the river, and they want to take a risk. It is also possible there was new kind of grain in Lithos, the Paleans wanted to grow them by exchange it with their baskets. The evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to valid the author's assumption.

Last but not the least, there is no proof that thousands of years ago the river was as deep and broad as it is today. Maybe in prehistoric era the river was so shallow that the Paleans can across it by their feet. With the time passing, the river became deeper and deeper which cannot be easily across anymore. Without the geography evidence which can prove that the Brim river has not any change until now, we cannot believe what the author claims.

As it stands, the argument is not persuasion as it stands. To make the argument more persuasive ,the arguer world have to prove that there is no other way to cross the river. Moreover, there still need some information concerning the geography changes had never happened and the Paleans never want to across the river.

AlexandraUID: 185174

In this argument the author claims that the founding of a "Palean" basket in Lithos can prove that the Palean baskets are not unique in Palean. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer points out that the Brim river which between the two countries [没有说明是countries啊？] is too deep to cross without a boat and there is no evidence can prove the Paleans had boats. In addition, the boat which can carry cargo and groups of peoples was not developed at that time. Furthermore, the Paleas need not to cross the river because there are full of fruits, nuts and small game in their place. The line of reasoning is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.
你句子的连接，比我好啊，向你学习

To start with, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the Paleans crossed the river. Though still now there is no evidence can prove that the Paleans have boat, it do not mean to there will be no any evidence can be found in the future. It is possible that the evidences were embedded by the earthquake happened thousands of years ago. Another flaw is that the arguer takes a assumption that it is beacuse the Paleans had no big boat which can carry groups people and cargo that they cannot across the Brim river. Without the big boat, the Paleans can cross the river buy other kinds of boat such as raft. Even if we granted that the Paleans had no any boat, there still other ways they can across the river. For example, there was a cordage bridge between each side of the river, people can easily across the river by it. The arguer commits a fallacy of unwarranted assumption to assume that no big boat there is no way to across the deep and broad Brim river.
都没有能力有船，还能造桥？
且，河是很宽 又深----你是在承认它的前提 下说的哦

Similarly, the arguer oversimplifies the reasons why the Paleans should across the river to arrive in the Lithos though they had all kinds of nuts, fruits and small game in their place. The exploration is the nature ability to human being. The paleans maybe so curious to another side of the river, and they want to take a risk. It is also possible there was new kind of grain in Lithos, the Paleans wanted to grow them by exchange it with their baskets. The evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to valid the author's assumption.啊，这几个理由，我感觉 很牵强啊。个人意见啊
Last but not the least, there is no proof that thousands of years ago the river was as deep and broad as it is today. Maybe in prehistoric era the river was so shallow that the Paleans can across it by their feet. With the time passing, the river became deeper and deeper which cannot be easily across anymore. Without the geography evidence which can prove that the Brim river has not any change until now, we cannot believe what the author claims.

As it stands, the argument is not persuasion as it stands. 这里改改吧，怎样？To make the argument more persuasive ,the arguer world have to prove that there is no other way to cross the river. Moreover, there still need some information concerning the geography changes had never happened and the Paleans never want to across the river.

尽管你写的，比我好，但是，我仍然要说，在组织句子上，你还要努力。
多练习长句。 还有，错误地方你提出，但是，在展开上，不够深刻。
继续努力哦！:)

也帮我看看我的吧，
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... 683&page=1#pid1

mkb57288UID: 2105771

In this argument the author claims that the founding of a "Palean" basket in Lithos can prove that the Palean baskets are not unique in Palean. <<两个宾语从句的靠得太紧不太舒服in alidate the uniqunessof ...>>To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer points out that the Brim river which between the two countries is too deep to cross without a boat and there is no evidence can prove the Paleans had boats. In addition, the boat which can carry cargo and groups of peoples was not developed at that time. Furthermore, the Paleas need not to cross the river because there are full of fruits, nuts and small game in their place. The line of reasoning<<其实前面的复述并没有构成the line of reasoning啊:O>> is unconvincing for a couple of reasons.

To start with, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the Paleans crossed the river. Though still now there is no evidence can prove that the Paleans have boat, it do（does） not mean (indicate)to there will be no any evidence can be found in the future. (感觉there be 用得太密了)It is possible that the evidences were embedded by the earthquake happened thousands of years ago. Another flaw is that the arguer takes a assumption that it is beacuse the Paleans had no big boat which can carry groups people and cargo that they cannot across the Brim river. (It is possible that, however,)Without the big boat, the Paleans can cross the river buy other kinds of boat such as raft. Even if we granted that the Paleans had no any boat, there still other ways they can across the river. For example, there was a cordage bridge between each side of the river, people can easily across the river by it.<<连船都没有，假设有桥似乎不大现实:) >>The arguer commits a fallacy of unwarranted assumption to assume that no big boat there is no way to across the deep and broad Brim river.<<The fallacy of unwarranted assumption arguer commits that ...render the conclusion open to doubt.因为感觉原句好像没说完>>
Similarly, the arguer oversimplifies the reasons why the Paleans should across the river to arrive in the Lithos though they had all kinds of nuts, fruits and small game in their place. The exploration is the nature （ability删） to human being. The paleans maybe so curious to another side of the river, and(that) they want to take a risk. It is also possible there was new kind of grain in Lithos, the Paleans wanted to grow them by exchange it with their baskets. The evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to valid(validate) the author's assumption.

Last but not the least, there is no proof that thousands of years ago the river was as deep and broad as it is today. Maybe in prehistoric era the river was so shallow that the Paleans can across it by their feet. With the time passing, the river became deeper and deeper which cannot be easily across anymore. Without the geography(ic) evidence which can prove that the Brim river has not any change until now, we cannot believe what the author claims.这一段的反驳很精彩很合理哦:)

As it stands, the argument is not persuasion as it stands. To make the argument more persuasive ,the arguer world have to prove that there is no other way to cross the river. Moreover, there still need some information concerning the geography changes had never happened and the Paleans never want to across the river.

另外个人觉得题目最大的逻辑漏洞在于，即使P不能过去也不代表L不能过来
:lol不知道你写这篇限时了没有，我现在总觉得写得太慢，要50分钟:L
谢谢你的细心修改，继续互拍吧https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... type%26typeid%3D102

mkb57288UID: 2105771

invalidates the uniqueness

AlexandraUID: 185174

mkb57288 ,你好 我很怀疑你说的“即使P不能过去也不代表L不能过来”
能说说吗？

MIMOSARLUID: 2112846

就是说，L 地区的人可以想办法过来把篮子带走，虽然P的人不能过去。我没想到，象脑精急转弯。不过mkb57288 确实聪明呀！