UNT The Pros and Cons of Self Driving Cars Paper

OPPOSING POINTS OF VIEW ASSIGNMENT

It’s important to include opposing points of view when you do persuasive writing. If you don’t, your reader might think that you’re unfairly biased and slanting the argument. Also, just because you fail to mention these arguments doesn’t mean your reader hasn’t thought of them. If there’s an opposing point of view that you don’t address, the reader might leave your paper with a lot of “Yes, but…” questions, and you’ll fail to convince.

On the other hand, you want the reader to come away agreeing with you, if possible. So, you don’t want to present the other arguments to the detriment of your own. The key to doing this well is twofold. The first part has to do with structure. You want to make your argument completely before you introduce opposing points of view. Then you need to make sure it’s clear that those points of view aren’t your own, generally by introducing them with a tag (“Some people might argue that…” “John Q. Scientist at Rutgers argues the opposite…”) Otherwise, the reader might think you’re contradicting yourself.

Finally, you want to end by restating your own argument in the conclusion. The second point is to make sure that you refute the opposing point of view – in other words, make counterarguments. If you’re trying to solve a problem, for example, and someone has proposed an alternate solution, then you need to show why their proposed solution won’t work – or, at least, why yours is better.

Look up the topic of self-driving cars. For your assignment, I want you to come up with three reasons in favor and three reasons against self-driving cars – and then come up with a counter-argument refuting each of those points. Notice that the counter argument of a pro isn’t necessarily a con – and vice versa.

Here is an example, using capital punishment (remember, your assignment is on self-driving cars).

In favor:

1. Capital punishment deters the most serious crimes. Counter-argument: There is little evidence of this. Do serial killers really worry about the consequences of their actions?

2. With capital punishment, the taxpayers are spared having to pay for a killer’s life in prison, which can cost up to $100,000/year. Counter argument: The cost of appeals legally required generally runs into the millions.

3. Capital punishment assures that a killer will never kill again – through escape or getting out on parole. Counter-argument: the argument is weak – don’t parole the killers and increase prison security.

Against:

1. Capital punishment is cruel, and our constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Counterargument: On what scale is cruel measured? It could be argued that a lethal injection is much less cruel than what happened to the victim.

2. Capital punishment disproportionately affects racial groups such as Blacks, Latinx and Native Americans. Counterargument: This is not an argument against capital punishment – it is an argument against systemic racism. If our country would address racism, these groups would not receive excessive sentences.

3. An innocent person might be killed. Unlike a life sentence, once a person is executed, there is no going back. Counterargument: Capital punishment should only be used in cases where the evidence is incontrovertible – when DNA evidence or video records are available.