此ARGUMENT的攻击目标是。。。

一方通行

The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.
"Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."
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.
找的点不多，请大家多多给点想法

冷月钟笛

文章：
1. F使用O方法在T岛得出V结论（20年前）
2. 我使用I方法在T岛得出P结论（近来），因为小孩和父母谈话多
因此：我说F结论错了，并且V方法在T岛错了，并且V方法在其他岛也错了

针对此逻辑攻击：
1. 我的I方法得出的结果能否证明P结论？
2. 即使证明T岛P结论成立，能否证明F的结论就错误？——20年的风俗转变
3. 即使F的结论错误，是否O方法在T就错误？——也许是岛上人表现异常，random error与非方法本身的system error造成；
4. 即使O方法在T岛行不通，I方法行得通，是否代表在其他岛也是这种情况？

基本进攻点差不多如上，扩展手段自由发散~

竹林中人

自己多发散

ppguo

看看其他人的提纲吧。
http://forum.chasedream.com/GRE_Prep/thread-592873-1-1.html

一方通行

嗯，第二点没想出来，很好的点子啊！谢谢啦

吸血鬼骑士

1 作者说和岛上的孩子聊天他们谈论自己的生父母比谈论其他人要多，这并不能证明D.r Field的结论是错的，也许孩子就是被整个村子来养但是和亲生父母关系相对更好些呢
2 作者和岛上的孩子进行的面对面的交流，但是不能保证孩子讲的是真话，也许岛上的人不希望外人接触他们的世界，破坏他们的文明呢，所以不能证明他们采访的形式是最准确，有效的
3 Dr.Field是20年前去的这个岛，也许20年后他们的风俗早已没有，现在也是亲生父母从小养育呢，但是这样作者不能证明Field博士的结论是错的