▶ Your Answer :
The reading passage contends that a brain
scan polygraph is better to detect a lie than the conventional polygraph by
giving three explains. On the other hand, the lecturer contradicts the reading
by saying that none of the three explains are convincing.
First of all, the lecturer argues that the
truth often misinterpreted as lies using a brain scan lie detector. When the brain
is holding information, the polygraph detects increase activity in the parts of
brain same as when people tell a lie. To be specific, if the truth person tell embarrassing
or sensitive information, then a brain scan lie detector may indicate
dishonesty. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s claim that the truth is
accurately judge by using a brain scan lie detector.
In addition, the speaker asserts that results
are not identifies in an objective method. This is because each people’s brain
has different functions. Also, there is no standard criterion for interpreting
the results of a new form of polygraph. Therefore, they still need expert to
analyze the results of the subjects experiment. This refutes the reading
passage’s claim that the results can be analyzed in an unbiased way.
Last but not least, the final point made by
lecturer is that a new polygraph makes easier to fool than a traditional one.
There are two examples to explain this. First, when people are solving a
difficult math questions, their brain may indicate that they tell a lie. Also,
if the people practice and rehearse to tell the untruth, their brain will
activate as if telling the truth. This contradicts the reading passage’s claim
that a brain scan lie detector is hard to deliberately trick. |