<p>Hey guys! I need you to score my essay. It’s a college campus one.</p>
<p>The professor casts doubt on Alan Turings test. While the passage claims that the Turing test can be used to examine a particular computers ability to think, the professor asserts that any kind of a machine no matter failed or passed the Turing test cant think as humans do.</p>
<p>First of all, the reading passage conveys the general process of the Turing Test. The reading passage also describes that in this test was built in order to find the answer to the question can the computers think. On the contrary, the professor emphasizes that John Searles argument about accuracy of this test is true.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the reading passage describes how the Turing Test is based: people in one room are expected to ask any questions they want by typing them onto a computer screen; then, when the answers are received, people must select which of all received answers are computer given and which are human given; afterwards, if one marks a computer answer with a human given onethe machine passed the test. In opposition, the professor says that this whole procedure is wrong because of different languages that people speak; and moreover, the professor gives a John Searles example that if monolingual English person wont understand a Chinese persons answers because of a natural reason. </p>
<p>Lastly, the professor argues against the passages point that this test can determine if a particular machine can think by stating that computers can be constructed to give a similar answer to the humans one but unlike human machines are not aware of whats their doing. The professor points out that Turing tests disability to answer the main question human-made intelligence, in fact, is actually the case.</p>
<p>Corrected version.</p>
<p>The professor casts doubt on Alan Turing’s test. While the passage claims that the Turing test can be used to examine a particular computer’s ability to think, the professor asserts that any kind of a machine no matter failed or passed the Turing test can’t think as humans do.</p>
<p>First of all, the reading passage conveys the general process of the Turing Test. The reading passage also describes that this test was built in order to find the answer to the question can the computers think. On the contrary, the professor emphasizes that John Searle’s argument about accuracy of this test is true.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the reading passage describes how the Turing Test is based: people in one room are expected to ask any questions they want by typing them onto a computer screen; then, when the answers are received, people must select which of all received answers are computer given and which are human given; afterwards, if one marks a computer answer as a human given one—the machine passed the test. In opposition, the professor says that this whole procedure is wrong because people speak different languages; and moreover, the professor gives a John Searle’s example that monolingual English person won’t understand a Chinese person’s answers because of a natural reason. </p>
<p>Lastly, the professor argues against the passage’s point that this test can determine if a particular machine can think by stating that computers can be constructed to give a similar answer to the humans’ one but unlike human machines are not aware of what they are actually doing. The professor points out that Turing test’s disability to find out the answer to the main question can human made intelligence think, in fact, is actually the case.</p>
<p>The professor casts doubt on the reading passage. While the passage claims several factors about Sydney Opera House’s design, the professor asserts her personal opinion which contradicts them.</p>
<p>First of all, the reading passage argues that Sydney Opera House was structured by organic architecture’s concepts. The reading passage also describes how Jorn Utzon’s, a designer’s of the Sydney Opera House, idealization of Organic architecture in his works and also fitting it to this work is the case; on the contrary, the professor emphasizes that Jorn’s collaboration with his supervisor, Frank Lloyd, is true.</p>
<p>Second the reading passage describes how the Sydney Opera House’s roof is structured to look like a sailing ship at full sail on the water. In opposition to this argument, the professor says that sails don’t serve a particular value except pleasing the eye. </p>
<p>Lastly, the professor argues against the passage’s point that the Sydney Opera House was suspended in its building several times and debated politically by stating that it’s an amalgam of engineering, architecture, and technology. The professor points out that the Sydney Opera House’s being a unique structure that people have ever build, in fact, is actually the case.</p>