Seeking Evaluation for GRE essay: Argument

[yeloFELO3]

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 following argument is flawed for various reasons. More specifically, it is grounded on the assumption of no geological variation along neighboring villages of Palea and Lithos. Also, it fails to attend to the fact that the Brim River may divide the two villages now, but that may not have been the case in ancient times. Lastly, the author is vague on the actual historical age of the Palea in comparison to Lithos which leaves room for the historical relation between the two villages.            

The author states that the Brim River was not crossable without using boats, but this argument is incomplete because it assumes that the Palean village was not connected to the Lithos by some other means. Many cultures found ways of either building bridges, using landbridges to cross over bodies of water, and chosen to walk long distances to move around them. To improve upon this argument, the author must show that there was no point in along the river or region that allowed the crossing and sharing of the particular pattern design for the baskets.

                Researchers assumed that since the Brim Rvier is deep and broad, there is a separation between Ltihos and Palean village.  However, this argument is not sufficient because the river is mentioned to be very deep and broad now, but that may not have been the case in prehistoric times when the Palean baskets were weaved. It is possible that the river was crossable by Palean without boats and hence both villages shared the same weaving design for their baskets. To improve upon this point, the author would need to cite evidence that the Brim River has always been separated the two villages to the point of inaccessibility from each other except via boat.

                The author assumes that Palean village and Litho are contemporaneous settlements in ancient society, but this observation is vague. Palea is noted to be a prehistoric village while Lithos is an ancient one. Various historical facts could explain the distinctive pattern being shared by both villages. It may be the case that the villages were united either in neighborly fashion or as single village before the development of the Brim river due to some unforeseen events. This river could have caused the premature ending of the Palea and the continue development and weaving of the basket pattern in Lithos for centuries to come. To strengthen the author’s claim, he or she must attend to more historical and geological data on the history of the regions encompassing Palea and Lithos.

                The argument that the baskets in Palea are not unique because a separate, isolated village is weak because it does not attend to geographical differences and historical change. Therefore, the author fails to be convincing on the point of non-uniqueness of the Palean baskets. 

               

[Feynman]

I would award 3.5/6 for this. Would have awarded 4-4.5 but resisted mainly because it felt like the paragraphs had repeated points at a few places, that could have proven the point more strongly if clubbed at the right spaces.

Over all, quite inspiring style of writing!

Thanks.