Susan Moenga

As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. The past two decades have seen an upsurge in technological advancements in almost every sphere of human undertakings. Not only have we developed gadgets that can monitor our homes while we are busy at work, but also robots almost as capable as human beings in a number of physical tasks in our factories. With every challenge in life, humanity has sought novel techniques and machinery to best address them. Contrary to the statement posited, it would be erroneous to simply conclude that such incredible advances in technology have reduced the human capacity to think for themselves. First, machines do not build themselves, but are established by the ingenuity of human minds after long and vigorous trials to ensure safety and efficiency. Moreover, the ability to develop commonplace gadgets as phones, comprise of thorough consumer market research, addressing particular needs and preferences; activities that need high levels of discernment to be able to live up to expectations. In addition to this, most technologies such as biomedical machinery are highly dynamic, needing constant upgrade to more efficiently address contemporary problems. Specialized institutions have therefore been established to train students towards such careers. Most students such as those in coveted institutions such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology have been diligently trained to develop market oriented gadgets solving real-life problems. It is common knowledge that admission to the aforementioned institute is reserved for exemplary and talented students. Last and most importantly, most machines in use do not operate themselves. A code is developed by a human being that when applied, enables the machine to function. To exemplify this, think of a fancy computer with a sophisticated operating system whose developer promises a performance that outshines all other extant computers. The very basic step of booting this computer, mining for the exact data or task that one would like to perform reifies the notion of its robustness. If the user has no idea how to use it, it could as well be a couch. However, in retrospect, repetitive engagement in simple and complex tasks kept our minds guile, able to do quick mind calculations when need arose and solve quick problems. This kind of dynamism might not be as abundant as before. With responsible use of technology, we might benefit further in terms of thinking complexity as long as we are careful not to be over-dependent.

Triscia: Excellent job. Simple coherent language, great flow of thought. Minor grammar issues (a hanging L before Linked). I would give you 5. The ample attack is great alslo because as much as we do not have all the information, there is the silent underlying assumption that perhaps the studies we bring to question have been actually done albeit not reported here. So the choice of tone is suitable.