Melvin: Anyone who believes that autonomous, computer controlled cars,

[quote="Bunuel"]Melvin: Anyone who believes that autonomous, computer controlled cars, are likely to catch on with the public at large overlooks the obvious danger associated with computer error, or the absence of human instinct to evade danger in high risk situations.

Amanda: Sure there are risks associated with computer error, but can we be sure that they exceed the risk associated with human error? Until we know for sure, it just may turn out that autonomous cars could be more convenient, and significantly safer than human driven cars.

Amanda responds to Melvin by

(A) attacking Melvin personally, rather than Melvin’s argument. - NO PERSONAL ATTACK

(B) pointing out that Melvin’s argument overlooks an important issue needed to make a valid comparison - YES HE OVERLOOKS AN ISSUE(can we be sure that they exceed the risk associated with human error?) BUT IT IS NOT NEEDED TO MAKE A COMPARISON, ITS NEEDED TO PROVE WHICH RISK IS HIGHER(WHO IS CORRECT)

(C) agreeing with Melvin’s overall conclusion, and providing additional evidence to support her agreement - SHE DOESNT AGREE TO OVERALL CONCLUSION(OVERLOOK RISK)

(D) refuting Melvin’s argument by pointing out a consideration that runs directly counter to Melvin’s claim - YES

(E) disagreeing with Melvin’s argument in part, but ultimately agreeing with his claim - SHE AGREES TO A PART BUT ULTIMATELY DISAGREES TO CLAIM


Ans: D