first time to write issue求批改，多谢多谢

cjlingyuanUID: 2876233

Issue topic: The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of human minds.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

I largely agree with the author's point of view. That machines are only tools of human minds is convincing, and the conclusion that the human mind will always be superior to machines is correct to some extent. But the logic between the cause and effect relationship is not tight; the result cannot be directly deduced by his reasoning. In order to make a valid conclusion, there is a need to better demonstrate.
In the first place, machines are only tools of the human mind. Machines can handle some repeated labor and a large amount of calculation, free mankind from physical consumption, and let humans be able to use more energy to think about higher levels of problems, which are insoluble problems to a machine. So, it can achieve the purpose of improving human efficiency. A good example is that human beings invented the computer to help people with the amount of calculation; the computer is a good tool but it can only be a kind of tool.
Furthermore, the human mind is senior to machines for two reasons. Firstly, the machine is a human creation which follows certain rules, and these laws are mastered by humans, so it is possible for the human mind to control the machine. Secondly, human beings can remake and update machinery according to our own thinking, and make machines satisfy different requirements. Using the different car productions as an example to illustrate, human minds design the standard procedures of car component specifications and machining processes, and provide the intelligent robot to obey, so the working machine will automatically create car productions with high quality and efficiency. Without the human mind, the machine cannot make it happen. So we can say that the human mind is superior to machines.
However, machines will be superior to human minds in some situation. Those machines with intelligent systems created by humans are a good example. With some basic rules the intelligent system can operate itself; the behavior and final result can turn out to be dramatically different from the rule builder’s expectation. The intelligent system can learn to change itself and adapt to the environment. It will have better answers for some specific questions than the human mind.
From the aforementioned analyses, in order to perfect cause and effect relationship, the author needs to complement the causes and to set the specific environment.

msshUID: 3072478

怎么批改这里有规矩吗？anyway, my two cents (mainly re your logic, not your grammar or style):

1. I like you main thesis, but a better statement is "the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise", not "the logic is not tight" - this is not idiomatic English.

2. Since your thesis in the 1st para. is that the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise (though you think they are both largely correct), your focus should be on why or how the conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. But what you actually did in the main body of the text is to evaluate the premise and the conclusion - which you already granted are correct!

3. Your argument in the 2nd para. didn't quite support the topic sentence (that machines are merely tools); it reads as though your main point was that machines are wonderful tools. So again, it seems to me you lost your focus.

4. You seem to have made little of the word "always"; you argued that machines today are inferior to humans for various reasons, but it's not clear how this bears on the question whether they will always be inferior to humans.

5. Because you drifted away from your thesis in the main body of the text, it's hard for the reader to see why you conclude that "the author needs to [modify his view]". (It's not clear to me what you meant by "complement the causes and to set the specific environment". Moreover, it sounds a little strange - maybe just to my ears - to refer to an "author"; I don't know what others think.)

cjlingyuanUID: 2876233

2# mssh

哇，多谢，我把你的建议复制了，下午再仔细改一遍。多谢多谢，万分感谢，嘿嘿

racsoUID: 2121392

I largely agree with the author's point of view. That notion that machines are only tools of human minds is convincing, and the conclusion that the human mind will always be superior to machines is correct in some perspectives(to some extent). However, ( But) the (logic)logical connection between the cause and effect (relationship) is not tight(;), making the result cannot be directly deduced (by)from (his)the reasoning. In order to make a valid conclusion, (there is a need to)a better (demonstrate) support is needed.

In the first place, machines are only tools of (the) human mind. Machines can better handle (some) repeated activitities, such as linear calculation and (, labor and a large amount of calculation), free mankind from (physical consumption) labor-intensive works, and allow (let) humans to (be able to use more energy) to focus on(think about) higher levels of problems, which are insoluble problems to a machine. (This sentence is long and confusing. I would rather break it down to short ones.)  (So)Therefore, (it can achieve the purpose of improving human efficiency) machines can out-perform human in some aspect. A good example is the computer, which is  invented by human-beings only to faciliate computing task but not meant to take over human intelligence  (that human beings invented the computer to help people with the amount of calculation; the computer is a good tool but it can only be a kind of tool.)

Furthermore, the human mind is superior (senior) to machines for two reasons. (Firstly)First, the machine is a human creation which follows certain rules, and these laws are mastered by humans, so it is possible for the human mind to control the machine. Secondly, human beings can remake and update machinery according (to our own thinking) at will, and make machines satisfy different requirements.

Using the (different ) car productions as an example to illustrate, human minds design (the standard procedures of ) (car component) part specifications and standard manufacturing (machining) processes, and provide the command for (intelligent) robots to follow (obey,). Then it's the machines' job to ( so the working machine will)  automatically carry on (create) car production task with high quality and efficiency. Without the human interaction (mind), the machine cannot make (it) these  happen all by itself. So we can safely conclude that (say that) the human mind is superior to machines.

However, machines will (be superior to human minds)certainly out-perform human in some situation. Those machines with artificial intelligence features(intelligent) (systems created by humans) are (a) good examples. With some basic rules the intelligent system can operate by itself; the behavior and final result can turn out to be dramatically different from the rule builder’s expectation. (This sentence is not supporing your idea) (The) An intelligent system is capable of self-learning (can learn to change itself ) (and adapt) in order to adapt to the environment. It will have better answers for some specific questions than the human mind.

From the aforementioned (analyses)analysis, in order to perfect cause and effect relationship, the author needs to complement the causes and (to) set the specific environment.

你的原文在括号里