The conclusion was done under certain premises and assumptions. Among the premises that the author had presented is the relatively slow speed of hominids that renders them incapable of chasing fast preys. This first premise, when accepted, makes the argument or conclusion logical. In addition to this, another premise that the author provided is that organisms eat to stay alive. This premise eliminates the possibility that organisms could select a food for other reasons such as the food’s texture or flavor. Lastly, another premise is that a comparison of the behaviors of beaver with hominids in regards to their foraging behavior is justifiable (Sayers). These premises likewise set the flow of the argument, but may not be considered rational nor reasonable if one examines the many factors that can influence food choices.
Three value assumptions that the author had, among the many he had stated, are: (a) evidence from anthropological techniques are good, (b) organisms’ diet and foraging techniques are important, and (c) the use of OFT (Optimal Foraging Technique) is a good basis for studying the pattern of diet of most organisms. Furthermore, three reality assumptions that may be identified from the article include (a) theories and evidences in anthropology are factual and conclusively reliable, (b) chasing prey is the only way to catch one, and (c) anthropology provide all the evidences that are needed to arrive at a sound argument (Sayers). The evidence presented are likewise based on a logical structure. That is, if his premises and assumptions are true and acceptable, then his conclusion must be valid. Among the evidences that the author presented are testimonials from the field of anthropology and researches that was previously conducted. Moreover, the author had his biases. The author’s bias is that he utilized a single theory and had continued with it without consideration of all other theories or speculations that could have more or equal merits regarding the diet of hominids. This inclination to utilize a single theory (OFT) had likewise made the author blindsided in a sense that he had accepted all premises and assumptions under the said theory and was not able to weigh the relative validity of the theory compared to others. Thus, his conclusion may be based on a theory that is not the best theory for analyzing the diets of hominids. His conclusion may also be actually logical, but the method by which he arrived at it is not generally acceptable.
Furthermore, the author had explained most of the terms in the argument such as the OFT and bunodont. The author had also used loaded words in the article such as “from a scientific standpoint”, among others and used equivocation that if hominids are slow, then they must be unable to hunt (Sayers). In summary, the argument presented by the author is not sound nor valid as it had been based on premises that are not well-established and assumptions that rather stayed as probable ideas.
Works Cited
Sayers, Ken. "Early Hominids Ate Just about Everything." Early Hominids Ate Just about Everything. 2015. Web. 23 Feb. 2016.
