argument37 V6站队 8.3

zehuaUID：199246

一种具有独特花纹的编织篮子以前只在史前村庄P的临近地区发现过，因而被认为是P居民所独有的。然而最近，考古学家在一个与P存隔着一条叫做B 的河流的村庄L发现了一个这样的P篮子。B的河水很深很宽，所以古代P人只能坐船穿过它，但没有证据表明P的人拥有船只。而且能够运载大量人和货物的船只直到P人消失几千年之后才出现。而且，P人应该没有必要穿过这条河流?D?DP周围的林地有丰富的果实和小动物。这表明这种所谓的P篮子不是P村的人所独有的。

(写的烂啊！感觉没话说！400字都没到！看来ARGU想拿高分也不是那么容易啊！）
-----------------------------
A basket found across the deep and broad Brim River does not provide sufficient evidence that people other than Palean could make such baskets.

First, there is insufficient evidence that Palean were unable to get to Lithos. The arguer fails to provide the conditions of Brim River in prehistoric periods. Perhaps the river at that time was merely a stream, fleet and narrow, which could be easily crossed over, or perhaps the river was non-existing at all. If that is the case, then Palean could easily come to Lithos with their unique baskets. Moreover, even if Brim River was as deep and broad as it is now, and boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were only developed after thousands of years, it is still likely that Palean could cross the river with simply boat like tools, such as a trunk floating above the water with their unique basket on it. It is also likely that Palean people were preeminent in swimming, and they could cross the river which seems impossible for present people.

In addition, the argument that Palean had no needs to cross the river due to sufficient food and recreation is groundless. Palean might well have other reasons to go to Lithos. Perhaps they had friends in Lithos, or possibly they wanted to have trades with Lithos people. Therefore Palean was very likely to cross the river for various reasons. As a result, the arguer must provide evidence that Palean had never come to Lithos for any reason.

Last, even if the river at that time was very deep and broad, and Palean had never been to Lithos for any reason, the arguer fails to consider other possibilities for the existence of a basket in Lithos. It is entirely probable that such a basket drifted across the river to reach Lithos by occasional nature forces, since only one such basket is found there, or possibly that basket was brought to Lithos by people living hundreds of years later. In any event, the arguer's conclusion is unconvincing.

In sum, the arguer's conclusion commits severe fallacies. The fact that a basket is found in Lithos cannot prove that such baskets are not unique to Palean. To better assess this conclusion, the arguer must provide data about Brim River in prehistoric periods. In addition, he should prove that the basket was not brought to Lithos by Palean or later generations.

[ Last edited by zehua on 2005-8-5 at 19:28 ]

dr_greenUID：193584

The arguer's conclusion is weak. A basket found across the deep and broad Brim River does not provide sufficient evidence that people other than Palean could make such baskets.
The arguer's conclusion is weak这句话其实没有什么作用啊 放逐四海而皆准就是对这篇文章没有意义 我觉得后面这句用来开头就很有冲击力了

First, the arguer fails to provide the conditions of Brim River in prehistoric periods. Perhaps the river at that time was merely a stream, fleet and narrow, which could be easily crossed over, or perhaps the river was non-existing at all. If that is the case, then Palean could easily come to Lithos with their unique baskets. Moreover, even if Brim River was as deep and broad as it is now, and boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were only developed after thousands of years, it is still likely that Palean could cross the river with simply with simple / simply with boat like tools, such as a trunk floating above the water with their unique basket on it. ^_^ 这个想法真可爱 我喜欢～ It is also likely that Palean people were preeminent in swimming, and they could cross the river which seems impossible for present people.
这段的开头ts是不是写成 作者没有足够的证据说明P人不能到L去 比较好呢 因为你其实提到了两个错误呀 但是开头只写了一个 还是你本来就没有要写ts？

In addition, the argument that Palean had no needs to cross the river due to sufficient food and recreation is groundless. Palean might well have other reasons to go to Lithos. Perhaps they had friends in Lithos, or possibly they wanted to have trades with Lithos people. Therefore Palean was very likely to cross the river for various reasons. As a result, the arguer must provide evidence that Palean had never come to Lithos for any reason.

Last, even if the river at that time was very deep and broad, and Palean had never been to Lithos for any reason, the arguer fails to consider other possibilities for the existence of a basket in Lithos. It is entirely probable that such a basket drifted across the river to reach Lithos by occasional nature forces, or possibly that basket was brought to Lithos by people living hundreds of years later. In any event, the arguer's conclusion is unconvincing.
这里是不是可以加上一条 文章中说 在L找到了“一个”瓶子 有这一条你的by occasional nature forces什么的就更有说服力一点 不然如果说读者没有注意到是“一个”瓶子 看到这里可能会想“难道L发现的瓶子们是从P集体大逃亡来的”。。。我的建议啦

In sum, the arguer's conclusion commits severe fallacies. The fact that a basket is found in Lithos cannot prove that such baskets are not unique to Palean. To better assess this conclusion, the arguer must provide data about Brim River in prehistoric periods. In addition, he should prove that the basket was not brought to Lithos by Palean or later generations.

我觉得写得很好呀～语言简洁 思路也很清楚 写P人不是不能到L；不一定不需要到L；瓶子不一定是P人带到L；很有条理乜 学习～学习～