WEEK 4 BLOG REVIEWS

WEEK 4 BLOG REVIEWS 9/7 & 9/9

Sandra Barocio – no posts to review.

Amara Villa-Rodriguez

9/9 The Little Deer :  In paragraph 3, a comma after “To me” would help break up this sentence. The objective portion of your painting description is very clear and concise. You kept a descriptive voice without adding any interpretation into this part of the painting. For the last paragraph, your interpretation of the impressionistic description of the Little Deer was very insightful and creative. You wrote in a logical order and gave a real sense of how this painting was meaningful and symbolized Frida Kahlo’s life. I enjoyed reading your post!

9/7 Conscious Machines?

In paragraph 2, add a comma after calculations to help emphasize the last part of your sentence: ”If the computer makes its move based on one of these calculations, is it really thinking?” The robot example that recoils against heat was a great point supporting the theory that machines do not have consciousness. I thought the sentence “The robot still felt no pain and no emotion to burning its hand“ was a great way to end the paragraph and give the reader a specific example of what kind of consciousness is lacking in the machines. You wrote a thorough summary of Wright’s essay.

Ricky Kriebel

9/9 The Bus

The objective description of The Bus is very specific and full of details. You are right on in your description. The impressionistic description was also very well written with the amount of detail and interpretation you used to describe The Bus. As soon as I saw your post called The Bus, it called to mind the terrible accident Frida was in. I think you may be right that she was definitely trying to represent different ethnicities in her painting of The Bus. Keep in mind about doing a spelling and grammar check before you post. There are a few verbs and articles missing in some of your sentences. Example: Next to her is a little boy or In the man’s right­­­­­­­­­­ hand is a bag.

9/7 Do You Think a Machine Can Think?

I really liked your introduction, it told me the topic I should expect from your essay.

Each paragraph explained an example that supported your main idea of “Do You Think a Machine Can Think?” In the chess example, you may have wanted to mention who Kasparov was in the chess world, in case your reader did not know. You summarized the opinions of Chalmers, Bennett, and Ryle very well and concisely. This paragraph is strong with examples. You may have wanted to conclude your essay with a few more sentences for your last paragraph to explain the rebuttal. I think this essay was one of your best and you were able to summarize Wright’s article very well!