- 1A. In an article regarding the created of SawStop technology suing Bosch, “SawStop, and their owner Stephen Gass, who happens to be a lawyer, issued a press release about their lawsuit against Bosch. They contend that Bosch, and their new ReaXX table saw, which also features flesh-detection and blade brake technology, is infringing on SawStop’s patented inventions.”
- 1B. Stephen Gass wants to sue Bosch because he believes they are using the same technology he used in his SawStop patent.
- 1C. This is an evaluation fact because it is evaluating the situation at hand, regarding Gass and his obvious belief that Bosch stole his technology, and wants to sue them. It is not a factual claim because although this is whats happening, the quote is merely stating what is going on and the beliefs of the parties involved, rather than saying that “Bosch stole Gass’ technology and is being sued because of it.” it is merely evaluating what is going on in this quote.
- 1D. This quote is pretty much self explanatory, as it is observing and telling about the situation that Bosch and Gass felt. It also includes a link to a website involving Bosch’s new table saw that mimics Gass’. The quote is very straightforward, although it still is persuading the reader to think about how or if Bosch should be sued simply based on the rudimentary information about the entire deal that was shown in the quote.
- 1E. I do not disagree with this quote as it is just saying what happened regarding the lawsuit.
- 2A. A quote regarding a man who wished to sue Bosch for not having sawstop technology in their miter blades, “Besides that, his injury would also have been prevented by properly following existing safety procedures that are well documented and clearly were violated in this instance. You can’t cut off your fingers if they don’t get near the blade.”
- 2B. The quote talks about a man wishing to sue for Bosch for not having safety procedures in their saws, even though he wouldn’t need the technology if he practiced safe saw etiquette.
- 2C. This is a factual quote as it is simply stating that if the man followed the procedures on the saw, and did not have his saw near the blade, he simply would not have chopped off his finger.
- 2D. This quote has a somewhat mocking tone,as obviously the man would not have cut off his finger if he was practicing safety, and even more so if his finger was not near the blade. Also, the man was suing for a blade that didn’t even have sawstop in any model from any company which I feel the author is mocking in the tone he talks about the man.
- 2E. I entirely agree with the quote
- 3A. In a quote about how the sawstop works, “The SawStop and other table saw safety devices are actually very simple. They run an electrical current through the saw blade that is attached to a current monitor. When the blade is cutting wood (a poor conductor of electricity) the electrical current in the blade remains constant. If the blade touches flesh (a relatively good conductor of electricity) the current in the blade drops. The current monitor senses this drop, and triggers a brake mechanism that immediately stops the blade and retracts it into the machine. The blade can be retracted within 3-5 milliseconds, resulting in a 1/8-inch cut on a single finger, instead of a catastrophic amputation of fingers and limbs.”
- 3B. The quote talks about how the sawstop detects flesh and stops the blade from amputating limbs and fingers.
- 3C. This is a factual claim, as it simply is giving the fact about how the sawstop works
- 3D. It is persuading the reader to understand the technical nature of sawstop technology, and to be familiar with how it stops amputations.
- 3E. I find it hard to disagree with an explanation of how a machine works.
- 4A. In a quote about what Gass would like to happen, “In this particular SawStop Vs Bosch Reaxx lawsuit, the victory could have serious consequences for Reaxx owners. Not only is SawStop looking to block the import and sale of the Reaxx, but also the sale of the cartridges. That would mean Reaxx owners would be unable to replace cartridges. This is a component required for use. Certainly Bosch will work hard to ensure that doesn’t happen, but it will ultimately be up to the courts or a settlement between the two to decide.”
- 4B. The writer talks about what the owner of sawstop would want happen to the ripoff that Bosch made called Reaxx.
- 4C. This is an evaluative claim as it is reviewing the situation, and although the cartridge is not technically “required” for use as the write claims, it is necessary for the blade to stop if it came in contact with flesh.
- 4D. The writer is trying to persuade the reader to understand the situation, as well as be aware as to where to look next for the result of the disagreement, such as the court settlement.
- 4E. I agree with this quote, as it simply talks about the issue and evaluates both sides of the problem.
- 5A. In a work about the implications of the dangers of power saws, “Now these manufacturers are facing dozens of lawsuits brought forth by people whose injuries could have been prevented had SawStop or similar safety mechanisms been in place. People who have lost fingers, hands, and arms to table saws have been devastated by their injuries, multiple surgeries, and medical bills they may never be able to pay so long as they are unable to work.”
- 5B. This quote talks about how technology like sawstop could stop many amputations and injuries.
- 5C. This is an opinionated claim as it is saying how injuries that “could” have been prevented, not injuries that would have been prevented. It seems as if the author views the sawstop in high esteem and believes it to be the end of amputations from power saws.
- 5D. This quote is trying to persuade the viewer that sawstop technology, or similar technologies, could potentially save many people from pain and amputations and I believe does a good, concise job in moving the statement about it forward.
- 5E. I agree with this quote as it not only talks about a potential possibility for sawstop, it also brings how people are affected that didn’t have this technology and how useful it can be for future potential accidents.
Counterintuitive 