'Rise Of The Machines Is Not A Likely Future'
In both articles, “'Rise of the Machines' is Not a Likely Future” by Michael Littman(2015) and “The Machines are coming” by Zeynep Tufekci (2015), the writers are aware of the advancements of technology, however the conclusion they arrived are very different. While Littman believes that it’s impossible for artificial intelligent or robotic technologies to takeover humanity, Tufekci on the other hand believes that human labor are being usurped by the advancement of technology.
After reviewing both articles, we believe that Tufekci’s work is more persuasive in delivering her points to her intended reader, in terms of using evidence to support her thesis, as well as the style she used to convey her message.
In Littman’s article, many pieces of …show more content…
However, her reasoning and justification regarding the evidence was more effective in conveying her thesis to her targeted audiences. One example was her personal experiences of her conversation with the call Center worker in Philippines. In the article, she wrote that “He was probably right. He is dispensable.” (Tufekci,2015) Here, she uses emotional appeal to invoke the empathy of the readers towards the worker, establishing a strong rhetorical appeal. Following which, she linked this statement back to her thesis and justify that machines can replace human labour, in this case the call centre workers.
Throughout the article, there were no subheadings used to help reader follow her line of thoughts. Similar to Littman’s article, there was also a lack of transition used to help readers move through the writing.
Even though the writer is very firm in her stance, throughout the article, she did not use a harsh tone. Instead, she uses a passive tone to convey her message. Also, she did not force her perspective on her audience but she gave room for her readers to develop their own opinions. She uses a “third person” pronoun, removing the subjectivity of the article and used first person pronouns only when she provided personal experience. She also kept each paragraph short and simple, to prevent overloading, of information for the readers and kept the flow of the article smooth. Thus, it’s a more effective way of
After reviewing both articles, we believe that Tufekci’s work is more persuasive in delivering her points to her intended reader, in terms of using evidence to support her thesis, as well as the style she used to convey her message.
In Littman’s article, many pieces of …show more content…
However, her reasoning and justification regarding the evidence was more effective in conveying her thesis to her targeted audiences. One example was her personal experiences of her conversation with the call Center worker in Philippines. In the article, she wrote that “He was probably right. He is dispensable.” (Tufekci,2015) Here, she uses emotional appeal to invoke the empathy of the readers towards the worker, establishing a strong rhetorical appeal. Following which, she linked this statement back to her thesis and justify that machines can replace human labour, in this case the call centre workers.
Throughout the article, there were no subheadings used to help reader follow her line of thoughts. Similar to Littman’s article, there was also a lack of transition used to help readers move through the writing.
Even though the writer is very firm in her stance, throughout the article, she did not use a harsh tone. Instead, she uses a passive tone to convey her message. Also, she did not force her perspective on her audience but she gave room for her readers to develop their own opinions. She uses a “third person” pronoun, removing the subjectivity of the article and used first person pronouns only when she provided personal experience. She also kept each paragraph short and simple, to prevent overloading, of information for the readers and kept the flow of the article smooth. Thus, it’s a more effective way of