In the given set of information, both the reading passage and the lecturer discuss the use of brain scan lie detector. The lecturer casts doubt on the author's assertion that brain scan lie detector can accurately measure neural activity, by presenting three compelling counter-arguments.
First, the lecturer asserts that true statements can be considered as dishonest, despite the use of brain scan detector. For instance, a person may supress truthful information when asked an embarssing question. Although this is just to avoid a sensitive topic, brain scan may still indicate that the person is being dishonest. This refutes the author's claim that true statements are always indicated correctly by the detector.
Second, the lecturer claims that interpretation is inaccurate as each person's brain functions differently. The lecturer says that there is no standard way to analyse the results objectly. Also, misinterpretation would increase, when experts are involved to interpret the results. This counters the author's assertion that results of brain detector can be interpreted objectly.
Lastly, the lecturer indicates that it is more easier to fool the brain scan detector than the conventional polygraph. For example, when a person is solving a mathematical problem, while answering a question, one can mask lies. Moreover, rehersed lies can be disguised as honesty. This refutes the author's statement that it is difficult to intentionally trick brain scans. |