Argument task 1

[abhinabera]

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.

This argument is flawed for numerous reasons.

Firstly, it assumes that a particular type of weaving or a distinctive pattern which was made in the immediate vicinity of the village of Palea and hence was made by Palean people. It could also be true that some one from some other village such as the Lithos could have come and settled in Palean and hence woven those baskets which later the Palean people learnt and largely adopted.

Second, since the Brim River was deep and broad and Paleans needed a boat to cross the river, it neglects the three other forms of transportation such as through air, road or railways and assumes that boats are the only way to travel to the village of Lithos.

Since it neglects the other forms of transportation to Lithos, it can be true that some person from Palea had taken other forms of transport and went to Lithos were he used to weave baskets in this distinctive pattern and hence the basket was made only by Palean people.

Therefore, it would have been better if the argument contained more information about the distance or the mode of transports possible from Palea to Lithos and also the time period of the discovery of the basket in Lithos might have helped us determine whether the basket is truly Palean or not.

Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, I would like to conclude that we cannot form a fixed conclusion about the origin of the baskets.