"[T]he proliferation of SUVs has created huge problems (C). Their
safe image is an illusion. They roll over too easily (p1), killing and injuring
occupants at an alarming rate (p2), and they are dangerous to other road users (p3 /sub C) ,
inflicting catastrophic damage to cars that they hit (p4) and posing a lethal threat
to pedestrians (p5). Their “green” image is also a mirage, because they contribute
far more than cars to smog and global warming (p6). Their gas-guzzling designs
increase American dependence on imported oil at a time when anti-American
sentiment is prevalent in the Middle East (p7)."
Keith Bradsher, High
and Mighty: SUVs-The World’s Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They Got That Way
Found in: Lunsford, Andrea. Ruszkiewicz, John. Walters, Keith. Everything's an Argument with readings. 2004. Bedford/St. Martin’s. Boston New York.
Standard form:
SUVs roll over too easily.
SUV roll overs kill and injure at an alarming rate.
SUVs are dangerous to other road users.
SUVs inflict catastrophic damage to cars they hit.
SUVs pose a lethal threat to pedestrians.
SUV's contribute far more than cars to smog and global warming.
Their gas-guzzling designs increase American dependence on imported oil.
The proliferation of SUVs has created huge problems.
I like your use of standard form to break down the argument. This argument is a prime concern to me. This argument may have been true in 2004, but not today.
ReplyDeleteThe SUVS today are much different from the SUVS of 2004 and back. Not all of the premises are true. For example, some SUV cars like my own have an ICC system (intelligent cruise control system). This system allows my SUV to adjust its speed with the flow of traffic. This lessens the likely hood of hitting a car on the off chance that I was not as aware as I should be on the road. Roll over rates of SUVS have dropped significantly with many of the newer redesigned models of today.
What label do we ascribe to these arguments where the premises are true for a period of time, but then they change.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteRaj, I have no opinion on SUVs. I simply found something that was brief and looked like an argument I could put into standard form.
DeleteEverything I read looks like something that will work. Until I try to break it down.
No new label needed. The premises may have been true once, but now at things have changed they may be false.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that many new cars and SUVs have various mechanisms designed to prevent accidents, including rollovers, such as gyroscopic stability control and ICC. We would need to look at actual statistics to see if these add-ons are making enough of a difference, though. High, large vehicles are inherently easier to roll over, and these features may help but don't repeal the laws of physics.
Moreover, Robin's argument does not rest exclusively on rollovers -- there are premises about pedestrians, fuel economy, visibility, damage to other vehicles, etc., that remain true, so even if the rollover issues is diminished, I don't think that's fatal to the argument.