Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sources:
Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY 10032, USA.
p234-256.
This article is a lecture on how nose stimuli affect the nose stimulus and how our
CNS and PNS respond to the stimuli. The article starts of with an introduction that states
that everything that we ‘perceive’ is just a certain representation of the actual world with
what our brain has at its disposal. He then describes a multitude of different types of
odorant stimuli and how they interact with our nose and what reactions they typically
induce. Then it goes into detail on how the brain interprets the information from the nose
with a topographical map of brain activity. Then it goes over a bunch of things having to
How this could help my research is to give the reader some context on how I
came up with the question. If you think about it, isn’t it for the better or worse that we
can’t interpret certain stimuli? I mean we have skin that is sensitive to touch, but isn’t too
sensitive to be agitated by air molecules and eyes that can perceive all different colors of
the light spectrum, but not heat or ultraviolet radiation. If there was an evolutionary
reason for why we haven’t gained these traits, then what could be the problem?
he had access to a multitude of scholarly sources and research studies at his disposal.
Annotated Bibliography
web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=3e7cff93-dc74-4f5b-a448-
c7e3e55e26a2%40sessionmgr4010&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN
natural selection through special tests. These tests include analyzing genetic variants and
height, schizophrenia, total cholesterol, and (in females) age at menarche.], and a fitness
test. A sample test was conducted and showed positive results of humans evolving. Albeit
slow as the tests can only see one generation into the future, these tests are showing that
This will be useful to my research project in order to show how lifestyle changes
create technology that affects our environment, that new environment that we made in
return changes us.) It could be claimed that we could reach a certain point where
technology could exponentially drive our evolution to ludacris levels based on the rapid
changes in environment. It could also serve to prove just how much technology in itself is
the University of Toronto and is a core researcher of the Social Science Genetic
Association Consortium (SSGAC). As his bio suggests, his research primarily focuses on
Annotated Bibliography
being the individuals of European ancestry in the test who participated in the Health and
Retirement Study and the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
database, makes it safe to assume that his sources are coming from a trustworthy and
unbiased source.
web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=15&sid=aba8320e-6e55-47e2-add6-
b324596b0260%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN
=22484667&db=a9h.
This article talks about the effects of technology on human intellect. The concept
of augmenting human intellect, meaning humans being able to problem solve, isn’t new.
This article focuses on the applications of technology and how they make life easier. As
the use of internet, digital data in computers, and many other like devices makes life
easier, it goes to show how human intelligence can use and interact with technology and
vice versa.
How this will help my argument is to prove that technology is in fact a big part of
our environment. The internet, public databases, video projection, etc., makes it much
easier than ever to work around lack of resources and means of communication. Why this
is important is that this new environment requires us to move less and think more will
end us evolving into something that is less mobile and more intelligent. The phenotype
The author, Gardner Campbell, Vice Provost for Learning Innovation and Student
works in education management, meaning that he works with resources inside and
outside of school that affect the learning experience and learning environment. The
resources that he used for his article come from scholarly sources including: Harvard
University Press, Modern Library Press, Stanford Research Institute Project, Princeton
University Press, etc. It is safe to assume that he has access to a scholarly database where
he can pull data from different colleges and universities as well as high level library
access.
Daily, Mike, et al. “Technology for Human Augmentation.” EBSCOhost, IEEE, Feb. 2017,
web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=aba8320e-6e55-47e2-add6-
b324596b0260%40sessionmgr4008&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN
=121196472&db=a9h.
Technology is doing more than just doing their job right. Technology has the
capacity to not only transform our world and ourselves. This article goes over what are
This will help my argument with the many documents of research that it provides.
It will also help my argument for showing that there are people out there who also think
alike and say that we are still evolving due to our new technological environment. If I
have trouble finding something for statistical evidence, I can find something in here in
The authors of this piece are professionals in different fields with different
expertise that span video game design, user interface research (computational design,
interactive AI, Interface Technologies), and Computer Science. They are experts in their
field and have achieved feats like writing books or attaining prestigious roles in their
business.
Dublon, Gershon, and Joseph A Paradiso. “How a World Filled with Sensors Will Change the
Way We See, Hear, Think and Live.” Scientific American, July 2014. p38-41.
The article is about how taking away the limitations to the sensory technology
everywhere and how it can pull data in rooms about temperature, movement, and sound.
This data can be used to immediately track down the source of problems related to
broken heating systems, security, and much more. What’s more is that this data can be
used to replicate and create Virtually realistic environments, so people across the world
How this will help my essay is to show the reader how technology is being used
to interact with our environment now. In a futuristic sense, it could be claimed that we
could use this data collection tool to monitor the state of different environments and see
what phenotypes and traits correspond with them. Then as time goes on and data starts to
accumulate, researchers can figure out what phenotype is the result of a specific
environment. This article beyond these implications has yet to be explored further into
depth.
Annotated Bibliography
The authors both work at the M.I.T Media Lab, where they gather their own data
American, tells the reader that the source was creible enough to go into their magazine.
The article talks about our interactions with technology and ourselves and how
augmentation with robot applications might be the next step in human evolution. The
author highlights tech like google glasses for precision and mechanical exoskeletons for
strength, proving that technology can be built to fit any upgradable aspect of life. The
article also talks about transhumanism, which is a movement that aims towards finding
human limitations and looking for ways to enforce those weak points by enhancing them
with technology.
How this will help my pitch is to go further into the futuristic lens and claim that
technology might influence the environment soo much that we might have to augment
ourselves in order to adapt to the new environment that we caused. Other ways it can be
used is that I could use it as backup evidence to prove a claim that there have been
lead to. Either that, or I could use the authors source in order to pull noteworthy
the subject. However, the author does use credible sources in his article, being professors
Annotated Bibliography
that have written books on their specialized subjects, which makes the authors sources
credible.
Mckie, Robin. “Is Human Evolution Finally over?” The Observer, Guardian News and Media, 3
This article claims that evolution for humans is over. Their first claim is that we
are taking all of our genes into the next generation, meaning that everyone's genes are fit
for survival. His second claim is that our races now are being constantly mixed, meaning
that multitudes of different genes are being mixed, making them more immune to
diseases and other risk factors. His views are protected by a man named Peter Ward,
saying “I don't think we are going to see any changes - apart from ones we deliberately
introduce ourselves, when we start to bioengineer people, by introducing genes into their
How this will help my argument is that I can claim that there is still dangers in our
new technologically advanced, augmented, and evolved environment that will allow us to
evolve. This article will act as my counterclaim starter. For example, right now we face
economic inequalities ranging from all races, all of which experience hunger, disease,
inferior hygiene, and environmental hazards. Those who aren’t able to pass on their genes
due to these tragic events will die off and the successful ones, whether they were smarter,
more social, harder working, or just better all arounders, their genes will be passed on.
The author isn’t an expert on the subject since he writes works for the news, so he
had to find credible sources in order to be used as credible evidence. He cites different
Annotated Bibliography
professors, biologists, and authors from different Universities, meaning that his claims/
Quadflieg, Susanne, and Kami Koldewyn. “The Neuroscience of People Watching: How the
Human Brain Makes Sense of Other People's Encounters.” EBSCOhost, Wiley, May
2017, web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=7&sid=3933da75-9427-450a-a409-
5254cdac7f45%40sessionmgr4010&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN
Stock, Jay T. “Are Humans Still Evolving?” EMBO Reports, Nature Publishing Group, July
2008, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3327538/.
This article asks the question of whether or not humans are still experiencing
evolution. It starts with two paragraphs giving us vital information so he doesn’t have to
assume that we know about the theory of evolution or Charles Darwin. He then states the
claims of the non evolutionary side which states that humans aren’t evolving due to our
dependence on culture and technology, which in turn has the author conclude that culture
plays an important role in evolution. The article then states instincts in animals that also
influence evolution like behavior patterns, survival instincts, and adaptation. The author
then goes into the evolutionary side, where there are facts that show how the environment
This source can be used in many different ways based on the flexibility and
vastness of the content. Since it describes both arguing sides, I can say that there are
professionals in this field that support both sides. I could use the claim about how the
Annotated Bibliography
technological culture has eliminated environmental stress in order to aid the counter
argument side/highlight something I’m going to refute. I could also use his evidence to
support my claims in the evidence he uses to show that there has been evolution in human
The author is credible because he earned a Phd for the discussion of the article,
Thomas, Saaty. “Part 2—The Firings of Many Neurons and Their Density; the Neural Network
web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=4&sid=704d1d4f-0ec7-4244-ac6f-
441c45462f77%40sessionmgr4009&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN
...