Self-driving cars are on of today's biggest controversies. In the article,”Is the idea of driverless cars gaining popularity?” both sides of the argument are presented, however the con argument is stronger. Both sides of the article have different purposes. In addition, the pro’s author, Justin Haskins, has fishy credentials, while Whitt Flora’s are solid. Furthermore, Justin has one okay point supported by studies, but Whitt has many, very logical, science proved and good points. While Justin Haskins has a good argument, Whitt Flora’s is stronger in the article. Both sides of the controversy in this article have different purposes. Haskins’ purpose of the article is to open people up to the idea of self-driving cars. One way his writing shows this is by using an often complained about problem and it’s solution to write his side of the controversy. This would open people up to self-driving cars because it sheds light in a gray area for most people, who would take the fix if it's an easy one. On the contrary, Whitt’s purpose is to make sure people understand all parts of self-driving cars. One sentence that shows this is, “A nationwide network of million of self-driving cars whisking suburban …show more content…
Haskins only has one strong main point. In the text haskins uses the point that self-driving cars offer more comfortable travels to support that self-driving cars are a good thing. To make his argument stronger he uses studies to back up his point, which makes his argument a little bit stronger. However, Whitt has many supported arguments. One example of an argument is, “ self-driving cars will likely not be cheap either. One report says making a car completely self-driving would add some $10,000 to its price.” By using another source it makes her argument stronger. She uses this method one other time, but then uses science and human example may other times. While Haskins has one main strong point, Whitt has