In the reading passage, the author claims smart cars that will be
available in the near future by today’s ever-evolving technology, and that these will be are beneficial in many
ways. On the other hand, the lecturer refutes the author’s claim by opposing
the benefits of smart cars mentioned by the author.
First, the
lecturer states that smart cars could make accidents. He
argues that sometimes, cutting-edge computer devices equipped in smart
cars would fail, thereby leading to car
accidents. What is more, smart cars will follow each other closely, which makes
the chance that the more number of cars will get involved in an accident higher.
This casts doubt on the author’s claim that smart cars can save lives.
Second, the
lecturer argues that smart cars will generate additional traffic problems. This
is mainly because, if convenient, smart cars are
available for people, to say more convenient cars, then more and more
people will buy them and this will increase the number of cars on the road.
Consequently, traffic congestion will be worsened by the
additional number of cars. This contradicts the author’s argument that traffic
problems will disappear with the wide use of smart cars.
Third, the
lecturer points out that people could not would
not be able to save money by the use of smart cars. Considering the high
price of using global positioning technology and other state-of-the-art
technologies such as sensors, and computer devices, people will have to pay a
lot of money when they use or maintenance maintain
them. Furthermore, the devices that have advanced technologies require more
careful maintenance thereby costing more money to users. All of these factors
will offset cost-advantages from using smart cars. This directly opposes the
author’s assertion that smart cars will reduce the cost of driving.
Writing
0-30 Score Scale |
Good (24-30) |
Score |
27 |
Overall
Comment: |
두 입장을 매우 잘 비교하셨습니다.
문법 오류들 때문에 감점을 드렸으니 위 지적사항들을 참고하세요. |
|