Evaluate a speaker’s point of view, reasoning, and use of evidence and rhetoric, identifying any fallacious reasoning or exaggerated or distorted evidence.
Right from the first sentence their point of view is clear. In the phrase where it says "That's not very different from carrying on a conversation with someone in the vehicle." I think that is misleading, there is a different between having your phone in your hand to talking to someone with both hands on the wheel. Also where it states "answering a cell phone (or texting) can distract drivers with deadly consequences. But so can fiddling with the radio dial or scratching your back." I think some facts would need to be stated in order to back up this statement. However, the writer did back up some of their reasoning with facts and examples. It helped me understand both sides of the story when there were both pros and cons of the topic. With the other point of view where it states "since the advent of cell phones thousands of people have been injured or killed this way" I still think that these opinions need to be backed up with facts of the amount of people who are killed by texting compared to how many are killed by changing the radio or "scratching your back." lastly within the pros of banning the use of cell phones "Many years ago, when indoor smoking bans were first proposed some people thought that idea was crazy. We now see the wisdom of this approach." I liked how it compared to a law that seemed to have the same reaction from the people from a couple years ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment