In the reading passage there is ample support for the author's claim that a brain scan lie detector is more precise than the convential conventional one. However the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author's point.
First, the professor contends that even the brain scan lie detector can misidentify the subject's intention. In some cases even a truthful person can avoid the intentional reply, if the topic is embarrassed to talk about. Then, the detector mispercept mistakes (misperception이라는 명사는 있어도 mispercept처럼 동사로 쓰지는 않습니다.) the subject's intention and concludes itself that the subject is lying. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that the brain scan lie detector identifies the subjects statement accurately, even though (띄어쓰기) there are many variable circumstances, such as the subject's mental illness.
Next, the professor insists that the brain scan lie detector is not an objective method compared to the conventional one. (이건 서론에서 이미 밝힌 ‘lecture의 주제’이지, ‘두 번째 point’로 삼을만한 문장이 아닙니다.) Every people has a distinguishable brain and mentality, thus evaluating every people with an objective standard does not lead to the an objective result, Actually leads but to the a more subjective result. Consequently, to obtain a more precise result, the experts are essential in detecting. This counters the reading passage's assertion that the brain scan lie detector offers more objective outputs, since there are no expert's room for subjectiveness opinion.
Finally, the professor argues that even the brain scan lie detector can be easily fooled by a the subject. There are two ways tricking the detector. One is to think about intricate problems, such as mathematics, then the overall brain activity increases and may mask the subject's intention. The other is to rehersaling rehearsing yourself a false story in the brain, which can trigger increase the activity of specific nerves and leads the detector to mispercepts mistake that the subject is the telling the truth. This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that the subject would have hard time to fool the brain scan lie detector, on the other hand while the conventional one could have easily fooled by chemicals, such as drugs that changes the certain body certain reactions.
Writing 0-30 scale
Fair (21-2)
전반적으로 두 passage의 내용을 잘 정리하고, lecture가 reading을 반박하는 논리를 잘 설명했습니다.
다만 문법과 표현 면에서 부족하거나 어색한 부분이 많습니다.
명사의 단복수 및 관사(a/an/the/무관사)의 사용에 주의하세요.
단어의 품사에 주의해서 정확한 표현을 사용하세요.
말하고자 하는 바를 제대로 표현하지 못하는 문장이 있어 본문에 수정했으니 확인하세요.