Annotated Bibliography

Sources:

Alex, Richard. “SCENTS AND SENSIBILITY: A MOLECULAR LOGIC OF OLFACTORY

PERCEPTION.” Nobel Lecture. 8 Dec. 2004. Howard Hughes Medical Institute,

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

do with neurological interactions between neurons in different parts of the brain.

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?

The author is a University professor as well as a professor of biochemistry and

molecular biophysics, of neuroscience, and of pathology. Being a professor, that means

he had access to a multitude of scholarly sources and research studies at his disposal.
Annotated Bibliography

Beauchamp, Jonathan P. “Genetic Evidence for Natural Selection in Humans in the

Contemporary United States.” EBSCOhost, 7 Dec. 2016,

web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=3e7cff93-dc74-4f5b-a448-

c7e3e55e26a2%40sessionmgr4010&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN

=116820934&db=a9h. Vol. 113 Issue 28, p7774-7779. 6p.

Through recent innovations in molecular genetics, it is now possible to test for

natural selection through special tests. These tests include analyzing genetic variants and

their associated phenotypes to determine whether selection happened, polygenic score

analysis [includes body mass index, educational attainment , glucose concentration,

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

humans are evolving.

This will be useful to my research project in order to show how lifestyle changes

induced by technologies effects on the environment is making us evolve. (note: as we

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

indirectly affecting our environment and how we interact with it.

The author, Jonathan P. Beauchamp, is the Assistant Professor of Economics at

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

applied microeconomics, behavioral economics, and “genoeconomics”. His sources,

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.

Campbell, Gardner. “EDUCATION, Information Technologies, and the Augmentation of

Human Intellect.” EBSCOhost, Taylor & Francis Ltd, 2006,

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

that prioritizes augmenting neurological capabilities could potentially become the

dominant phenotype over the phenotype that prioritizes moving efficiently.

Annotated Bibliography

The author, Gardner Campbell, Vice Provost for Learning Innovation and Student

Success and Associate Professor of English at Virginia Commonwealth University,

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

novel ways to augment the human senses and communications.

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

order to help me prove or strengthen my claims.

Annotated Bibliography

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

database has a multitude of capabilities. It speaks of how sensory technology is

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

can experience the environment away from the actual location.

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

and have access to a multitude of scholarly resources. The publisher, Scientific

American, tells the reader that the source was creible enough to go into their magazine.

Hughes, Matthew. “How Technology May Be Influencing Human Evolution.” MakeUseOf, 27

Aug. 2014, www.makeuseof.com/tag/technology-may-influencing-human-evolution/.

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

considerations of the implications of such augmentation technology and what it could

lead to. Either that, or I could use the authors source in order to pull noteworthy

information from and use that in my argument.

The author of this article is a software developer, meaning he isn’t an expert on

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

Feb. 2002, www.theguardian.com/science/2002/feb/03/genetics.research.

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

bodies, so they live longer or are stronger and healthier.”

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/

work/article was founded upon solid evidence.

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

=123282872&db=a9h. Vol. 1396 Issue 1, p166-182. 17p.

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

changing is affecting fruit flies and skin tones.

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

skin tone and fruit flies.

The author is credible because he earned a Phd for the discussion of the article,

being Biological Anthropology, Archaeology, and Paleobiology. He also cited a vast

variety of credible scholarly sources.

Thomas, Saaty. “Part 2—The Firings of Many Neurons and Their Density; the Neural Network

Its Connections and Field of Firings.” EBSCOhost, Feb. 2017,

web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail/detail?vid=4&sid=704d1d4f-0ec7-4244-ac6f-

441c45462f77%40sessionmgr4009&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN

=120756634&db=a9h. Vol. 86, p115-122. 8p.

...