【☆09GRE作文冲刺组☆】三月八号号作业

爱上猪的狗UID: 2598667

In the argument, the author claims that woven baskets characterized by Palean were not unique to Palea which contraidicts with former idea because they were found in Lithos. To support the conclusion, the writer cites that Palea could crossed Brim River which connects two areas only by boat, but there is no evidence to prove that the boats could carry people when Palean people existed. And he or she infers that Paleans can satisfy their needs without going out. The argument suffers from several flaws which render it quesitonable. My argument for this point are listed follows.
As a threshold matter, the arguer simply assumes that boats are the only means to arrive at Lithos. Perhaps Palean is smart enough to get out other ways, such as building a bridge. Even assumping that they have no idea to cross the river, maybe they discovered that they could walk through dry lands. Without ruling out all these possiblities, although it is entirley possible, the arugment provides no evidence to support the assumption, so the assertion can’t be taken seriously.

Next, even granted that they couldn’t cross the river without boats, the author fails to substantiate that there is actually no boats in Plean. “boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared” can’t exclued of existance of other kinds of boats which could get through Lithos.
In addition, no direct evidence is provided to show that Palean had need to cross the river even if the area full of nuts, berries and small game. Perhaps there are many other needs besides the author mentioned above. They migh have the consciousness that intermarrying Lithos would be beneficial to posperity and found something absrobbing them deeply.
Last but not least, it is entirely possible that individuals of Lithos crossed the river to Palean, then they brought the woven basket backe to their hometown. In the article, the writer provides no information the usage of boats in Lithos and it is likely that lithos people could go to Plean. Thus, this will be a perfect explanation to the discovery in Lithos which will also refute author’s viewpoints.

To sum up, the author cannot justify his or her conclusion on the basis of scant evdence provided in the passage. He or she has overlooked many aspects which could overthough the result. To better evaluate the argument, the author should give more evidence about the boat in Pelean , as well as Lithos; And we also need to know more specific information about two places, such as demography, geographical conditions ,agriculuture and their acitivties to draw the conclusion.