His argument is drawn from the same 3 source sentences that everyone else has already discussed: 1) Yasuke was given a stipend.
Explanation
The claim suggests that the argument about Yasuke relies solely on three source sentences that have been widely discussed. However, the context hints at a deeper nuance; the statement that 'Yasuke was given a stipend' appears in only a single historical account (the Sonkeikaku version) among numerous other accounts about his life. This implies that while some arguments regarding Yasuke might reference similar sentences or facts, there is a lack of comprehensive historical consensus on the precise details. Thus, the assertion that everyone's argument is similarly limited may be an overgeneralization. It paints all discussions as derivative without acknowledging the complexities and differences in sources available regarding Yasuke's life and status.
Key Points
- Yasuke's stipend is mentioned in only one historical version, not universally accepted across sources.
- The claim generalizes arguments about Yasuke, oversimplifying discourse on a complex topic
- Historical discussions can vary significantly, and attributing sameness may misrepresent scholarly work.
