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 author established a connection between woven baskets and Palean people. It assumed that evidence for proving woven baskets do not belong to Palea uniquely, are sufficient and convincing. Conversely there are lacks of evidence for this argument that support its point.
First of all, it must be considered over time the brim river depth or its broadness maybe has changed. It is possible the brim river was being as deep as Palean people could have crossed the Brim river without needing to boats. Hence, according to point that no Palean boats have been found, we do not wish to agree with the author. In addition, maybe Palean people were being proficient swimmers and could have swum from Palea to Litthos simply by themselves.
Other point that is debatable, it is ambiguous statement "archaeologists have found no Palean boats." There are some possibilities because of material vulnerability that are used in boats structure, boats are destroyed over time and there is no vestige of them now. Also, archaeologists have not found any Palean boats maybe Palean people have used others boats, for examples boats made by Lithos people.
Finally, Paleans could have traded with people of Lithos, they used woven baskets for carrying own products. Therefore, such a "Palean" basket is discovered in Lithos.
In conclusion, the author did not bring in adequate evidence that could be support its claim. In other words, Exiting evidence is not cogent. If author could be able to strengthen own assertion by sufficient evidence, we can concur to him/her.
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 author established a connection between woven baskets and Palean people. It assumed that evidence for proving woven baskets do not belong to Palea uniquely, are sufficient and convincing. Conversely there are lacks of evidence for this argument that support its point.
First of all, it must be considered over time the brim river depth or its broadness maybe has changed. It is possible the brim river was being as deep as Palean people could have crossed the Brim river without needing to boats. Hence, according to point that no Palean boats have been found, we do not wish to agree with the author. In addition, maybe Palean people were being proficient swimmers and could have swum from Palea to Litthos simply by themselves.
Other point that is debatable, it is ambiguous statement "archaeologists have found no Palean boats." There are some possibilities because of material vulnerability that are used in boats structure, boats are destroyed over time and there is no vestige of them now. Also, archaeologists have not found any Palean boats maybe Palean people have used others boats, for examples boats made by Lithos people.
Finally, Paleans could have traded with people of Lithos, they used woven baskets for carrying own products. Therefore, such a "Palean" basket is discovered in Lithos.
In conclusion, the author did not bring in adequate evidence that could be support its claim. In other words, Exiting evidence is not cogent. If author could be able to strengthen own assertion by sufficient evidence, we can concur to him/her.
