Tertia Report

Based on an experiment conducted talking to the children of Tertia, the author has concluded that the children were raised by their biological parents. This contrasts with results of previous experiment which concluded that the children of Tertia were raised by the entire village. The newly drawn argument, however, were based on rushedly described experiments. Unless the author can clarify the scope of the experiment and address the problems of interview questions' fairness, we cannot be sure of his conclusion.
The experiment's result was based on an unclear scope of several definitions, and we cannot compare the two experiments' results until we can establish the baseline. The definition of being raised could have been defined differently in the two arguments. It could have meant providing for basic physical needs of the children: food, clothes, shelter. Dr. Field's experiment could base the results of their finding on these definitions. However, Dr. Karp and his team's definition of being raised concerned itself more with emotional needs. We were not presented

Here Dr. Karp and his team assumed that it was because they were indeed raised by them. Yet it could also be the way the questions were asked that directed the answers that way. For example, they could be asking about something specific and was provided exclusively by their biological parents. It could also be the case that the culture had made the children more inclined to talk about their biological parents when they were indeed raised by the whole village. It is very important to consider the answers to the interview in context with the Tertian culture. In the same way that people from Asian culture were more 'indirect' in the light of Western culture, 'talking more about their biological parents' could just be a bias created by different expectations of two different