Search the Community
Showing results for tags '1'.
Hey all! I wanted to know if anyone would be willing to go over my essay for the GRE. Thank you so much for your time! Woven 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 made only by 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 have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. The argument above assumes that because a Palean basket was found a great distance from Palea past a major river, Palean baskets are not unique to Palean culture. The argument fails in its assumptions and lack of explanation for it to be considered. The author in the beginning assumes that the Paleans did not make any boats during the time and thus couldn’t through the river. It could very well be in the next couple of years on the site that the author begins to find remnants of rafts made by the Paleans. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. The way the author could strengthen the argument would be to find evidence that indicates that the Paleans did not make boats. Even if the river was an unconquerable barrier, it doesn’t mean that they were isolated as well. They could have interacted with other cultures, who then appropriated the ideas of the Palean people. Estimation of date of creation between the discovered basket and other baskets is crucial. The argument also uses vague language to describe the environment as well as the discovery. It is unclear the depth and breadth of the Brim River; only that’s “deep and broad.” It would also weaken this argument if it was discovered that the Palean people were strong swimmers and could overcome this barrier. It’s also unclear what the distinctive pattern gives artifacts a Palean distinction. If the argument went into further detail, it would most likely be strengthened. Nevertheless, we also run into the meaning of immediate vicinity. There is no explanation to the immediate vicinity, which could extend as far as 3 miles or be right under their feet. All in all, the author lacks a lot of detail in the argument to make the argument believable. Other evidence may need to be analyzed before it is believable.