ARGUMENT 希望大家给点建议 求狠拍

陈太白

The author predict that the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value merely in the light of the molds found used to make the ancient life-size sculptures and the detection that the miniature statuses are made by tools and techniques. It is unacceptable to accept the prediction. Further discussions on this issue would be presented as below.

The author rely on the information that molds of human heads and hands have recently found on kali to conclude the conclusion that the ancient kalians artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create the life-size clay statues of human figures, which is absolutely absurd. They have no sufficient proof to prove the molds of human heads and hands, found on kali recently, are the part of the life-size clay statues’, which give out another possibility that they are other statues’ heads and hands that has not been found. Even though they are the part of the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures, they cannot persuade us strongly that the clay statues’ bodies are produced by the models. So the author should present more sufficient evidence to prove his or her explanations.



Additionally, could the fact that the miniature statues, abstract and entirely different in style, proof the assumption that they are not produced by models? Of course no and maybe the models of the miniature statues have not been found. Any further linkage of these two phenomena molds could be used only for life-size sculptures and the explanation that the miniature statues are made with sculpting tools and techniques requires more evidence and is not justified by the data so far available. Plus, it is unwarranted to claim that the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures are made by models in terms of the unfound sculpting tools. The unfound tools do not mean the non-existent tools. The author is so illogical to come out the conclusion just by the limited evidence, few ancient kalinese sculpting tools have been found.



After analyzing the above two points, I would like to present my argument about the final prediction that the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value. The author gives us the reason that why the life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures increase in value is because the huge number of the ancient life-size sculptures, result of the convenience of manufacture using the molds, devalue the life-size sculptures while the tiny number of the ancient miniature sculptures, result of the inconvenience of manufacture using sculpting tools and techniques, overvalue the miniature sculptures. It is not an acceptable explanation I think. An artwork’s value is not just depend on the amount of it, it also rely on its culture value, on one hand. On the other hand, the people who once made or use the artwork is also essential. Thus, the miniature statues may be not increase in value since they have not much information of the history; on the contrary, the ancient life-size sculptures may be increase in value because they have.

In a nutshell, the author’s prediction may be true in some cases, but, overall, the conclusion reaches in this argument is invalid and probably misleading. More well-grounded evidence should be presented.

竹林中人

没题目没提纲看起来不是一般的费劲

竹林中人

总感觉还是不够具体，argu最好多分析下题目是怎么样的一个推理过程，然后指出推理过程的不合理前提或者环节，而不必有过多的论断性质的语句。

陈太白

哦 possibility多些是吧？ 就是有时感觉没话说 只能拿evalution 充数了 谢谢老大啊 我继续努力