In
this given set of materials, there is some discrepancy between the view of the
author and the lecturer over the issue of the moai that is (is로 써야하나요, are 로 써야하나요?) impressive masonry works found in Easter Island. With three
cogent explanations, the lecturer raises the objections to the alleged reasons
for building the moai.
To
begin with, the lecturer debunks the author's first conjecture since there were far more monuments than they should be. To elaborate in detail, the lecturer claims if they built
the monument yearly, the number of them should have been approximately 500 as
they had remained for 5 centuries. This is in direct opposition to the author's
claim that the moai would have been for celebrating one's victory who won a
competition.
On
top of that, the lecturer also indicates the dissent over the point on the
moai. The lecturer sounds convinced that the author is making an manifest error about the
reason for constructing the statues since some of them do not look into the sky(did not 과거형으로 써야 할까요?) while they
seem to look down. Moreover, any artifacts related to rituals were not found near of the mounds, which means that there is no reason to regard them as something religious. However, the author clarifies that the moai would have been built
for being used in religious ceremonies or rituals.
Thirdly,
the lecturer goes to expound that the author's final idea on the purpose of the
moai. The lecturer mentions opposite directions where the moai faces toward to
corroborate his opinion. The lecturer adds that some DNA analysis have proven
that ancestors of the residents in the island were related to Polynesian, however, they had settlements to not only the west of the island but also the north and south of it. For the reason, experts cannot be sure if the ancestors came from the west. This counters the author's theory that they might
have made the moai for showing their respect to their ancestors coming from the
west.