Article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist

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 examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

참고

There are several assumptions made in this argument:

1. The assumption that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is based solely on observations made during his visit 20 years ago. It is possible that Dr. Field conducted other forms of research, such as interviews with community members, which could have informed his conclusion.
2. The assumption that the observations made by Dr. Karp's team of graduate students are more reliable than those made by Dr. Field. It is possible that Dr. Field had more experience or expertise in conducting research in Tertian village culture, and therefore his observations were more reliable.
3. The assumption that the interview-centered method used by Dr. Karp's team is more accurate than the observation-centered approach used by Dr. Field. While interviews can provide valuable insight, they are not necessarily more accurate than observations. It is possible that the interviewees may have had biases or motivations for giving certain responses, whereas observations may be more objective.

If these assumptions prove unwarranted, it could weaken the argument that Dr. Field's conclusion is invalid and that the observation-centered approach is invalid as well. It is important to consider all forms of evidence and research methods in order to arrive at a well-supported conclusion about a cultural phenomenon.