英语翻译First,let me address the last two lines of this criticis

英语翻译
First,let me address the last two lines of this criticism,which I believe have been solidly refuted by a number of bodies of work over the last two decades—for example,from the research of Damasio,A.,1994.Descartes’ Error:Emotion,Reason,and the Human Brain,Gosset/Putnam Press,New York,NY.Damasio (1994),Isen (2000),LeDoux (1996),Salovey and Mayer (1990),their teams,and many others.Their studies have supported vital roles for emotion in many background processes:perception,decision-making,creativity,empathic understanding,memory,as well as in social interaction.Too many people,especially those who do not know the latest literature on emotion,think that emotion is only there when it jumps up and grabs their attention.Like with a blizzard,they do not notice the weather until it inconveniences them.But the latest findings suggest that emotion is always there,and usually it is helping regulate and bias processes in a helpful way,a way that contributes to intelligent functioning.Affective computing has emphasized such a role from its start:it has never been about making machines that would look “more emotional”; instead,it has been about making machines that would be more effective.
That said,cars do not have legs and airplanes do not flap their wings.Just because every living intelligent system we know of has emotion does not mean that intelligence requires emotion.Although people are the most intelligent systems we know,and people's emotion appears to play a vital role in regulating and guiding intelligence,it does not mean there might not be a better way to implement some of these goals in machines.It may be possible that there is something like the wheel,which has no precise human or animal equivalent,but which provides for some of the same locomotion goals.There may exist a kind of alien intelligent living system,something we have never encountered,which achieves its intelligence without having anything like emotion.Although humans are the most marvelous example of intelligence we have,and we wish to build systems that are natural for humans to understand,these reasons for building human-like systems should not limit us to thinking only of human abilities.
Finally,affective computing has always emphasized the need for a balance.Some machines won’t need any emotional abilities; while others might be improved with some subset of them.There is a time to express emotion,and a time to forbear; a time to sense what others are feeling and a time to ignore feelings.In every time,we need a balance,and this balance is missing in computing.Designers of future computing can continue with the development of computers that ignore emotions,or they can take the risk of making machines that recognize emotions,communicate them,and perhaps even “have” them,at least in the ways in which emotions aid in intelligent interaction and decision making.
12号之前完成。如果太多翻译后两段也可以，全翻译的我会补5分。thanks~

首先,让我谈谈最后两个这种批评,我认为线路已经驳斥了坚实的工作机构,在过去20年的数目,例如从达马西奥,答,1994年研究.笛卡尔的错误：情感,理性和人类大脑,戈塞特/普特南出版社,纽约,NY.Damasio（1994年）,河渡口（2000年）,勒杜（1996年）,沙洛维及梅耶（1990年）,他们的球队,许多等等.他们的研究证实了关键作用,在许多后台进程的情感：感知,决策,创造力,移情理解,记忆,以及在社会交往.太多的人,尤其是那些谁不知道最新的情感文学,认为情感只有当它有跳跃起来,争夺他们的注意力.就好像一场暴风雪,他们没有注意到天气,直到他们的不便.但最新的研究结果表明,情感总是存在的,通常这是帮助调节和偏见过程,是有益的,有助于方式向智能功能.情感计算已经强调了这种从一开始就发挥作用：它从来没有想过让机器看起来更加地“多愁善感”,被,相反,它在这一问题上的机器,将更为有效.
尽管如此,汽车没有腿,不皮瓣飞机翅膀.正因为每一个活着的智能系统,我们知道有感情并不意味着情报需要情感.虽然人是最聪明的系统,我们知道,人们的情绪似乎发挥规范和指导情报的重要角色,但并不意味着有可能没有更好的方式去实现这些目标的一些机器.也许有可能是一样的车轮,它没有确切相当于人类或动物,但一些为同一运动的一些目标提供.也可能存在着外来一种智能生活保障制度,是我们从未遇到过,可实现的情感,而不必像什么情报.虽然人类的智慧,我们有最不可思议的例子,我们希望构建的系统,是人类了解自然,人与制度建设等限制,我们不应该只考虑对这些人的能力的原因.
最后,情感计算一直强调,需要一个平衡的必要性.一些机器不需要任何情感的能力,而另一些可能与其中的一个子集改善.有时间来表达情感,以及时间,隐忍,一时间,感觉别人的感觉,一时间忽略感情.在每一次,我们需要一个平衡,这种平衡是在计算失踪.未来的计算,设计人员可以继续与计算机的发展,忽视情感,也可以采取制作机,承认情绪,他们沟通,甚至“有”,至少在他们的方式,其中的风险智能情感援助互动和决策.