In the article, “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid,” by Emily Anthes from the New York Times, the preconceived notions that coldblooded reptiles were not nearly as intelligent as mammals was addressed and argued to be wrong. Although species like lizards, turtles, and snakes have been understudied while other species have had a plethora of research released on them, recently scientists have revisited these deserving animals. Originally thought of to be very simple minded animals with very little intellectual knowledge, new studies have been released saying that they are not as primitive as many had thought. These new ideas connect to cognitive evolution, and because retiles, birds, and mammals all came from a common ancestor, the sophistication of that ancestor is can now be thought to be greater. In a variety of experiments performed on different reptiles surrounding their willingness to respond to environmental problems and problem solve reflect the new possibility of their more complex mind. Although the experiments performed were relatively simple, they had previously been overlooked, because the tests done were the same that were done on mammals, and scientists were not taking into consideration, and “scientists commonly [used] “aversive stimuli,” such as loud sounds and bright lights, to shape rodent behavior. But reptiles respond to many of these stimuli by freezing, thereby not performing.” However, now that researchers have learned what type of work needs to be done with reptiles, new advances can be made in this field.
Studies around cognitive evolution, or the way in which species come about solving problems, is very important to our understanding of ourselves and how we have come to the mental state in which we are today. Knowing that our distant ancestors were more advanced than we previously thought could possibly change our notions around our own and other species’ evolutions. This new discovery could also cause scientists to question how what notions other experiments were performed under, and if they need to be redone from a less biased point of view.
I thought that this article was written very well. The author incorporated different stories and examples that tied the whole piece together, but did not let that take away from the facts she was presenting. However, I wish that Anthes would have put into context some of the estimated times of evolution, so the effect of this new revelation was more tangible. Still, the article was a great read and extremely informative.
Citation: Anthes, Emily. "Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid." New York Times. 18 Nov. 2013. Web. 21 Nov. 2013.
I think Lilia chose a very interesting article and I thoroughly enjoyed her review on it. Firstly, she presents the background information very well. She concisely explains that it was originally thought by many that coldblooded reptiles are not as intelligent as mammals. I appreciated this explanation because I was actually unaware that that was a widespread belief. Also well presented is Lilia’s explanation of why this was a widespread belief. Furthermore, she touches on why this belief is wrong. Lilia presented the arguments of this article very well by summarizing why the incorrect idea that reptiles are unintelligent was so widely accepted, and then why that idea is incorrect. Another strong point is Lilia’s connection to humanity because she makes a good point about why this study is so important and relevant to our understanding of humanity.
ReplyDeleteThe review could have been made better with better use of quotes. My first suggestion is that Lilia could have included more quotes. This is a very interesting article with many quotable points. The review also could have been stronger if Lilia had better-integrated the quote she did use. It was presented kind of awkwardly and was a bit confusing when I first read it.
From reading this article and review I learned that until recently, it was widely thought that cold-blooded reptiles are much less bright than mammals. I find this interesting because I had never really given this idea much thought. I learned about the experiments that made people think this and I learned why these experiments were not a good indication of reptile intelligence.
I read Lilia's summery on "cold blooded does not mean stupid. I thought this article was well written and used a strong vocabulary throughout the review. Lilia's summery explained how scientist overlooked the reptile's intelligence. I like how she contrasted scientific studies between mammals and reptiles to show why they thought reptiles were relatively primitive. I also like how she provided a strong background before she went into the details. another thing I enjoyed about her article was her style of writing. Lilia writes with confidence and uses complex words to get her point across effectively. Something I would recommend changing, is to add more detail on some of the animals. which reptiles did the scientist overlook and how did they conduct their new experiment to examen this domain of animals. also I would have told the reader more about the incredible breakthrough this find was. now that scientist understand that reptiles aren't stupid, and react differently, more research can be done to species all over the world and we can understand more about the life that surrounds us. overall I really liked this article and found it to be am interested subject. one thing I found interesting about this article was how Lilia explained how the reptiles reacted to the normal mammal experiments and how the scientist realized their problems.
ReplyDeleteI read Lilia’s summary of the article, “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid,” from the New York Times. She concisely and clearly explained what is being done in relation to scientific research with the cognitive development of reptiles as opposed to mammals. She also did a great job explaining the mistakes of the scientists in their research, as previously it had not been considered that the reptiles’ reactions to certain stimuli would be to hibernate. I really liked her connection to humanity, as she explains the importance of understanding “how we [humans] have come to the mental state in which we are today.” This brings together the worlds of sophisticated mammals and those of our coldblooded relatives.
ReplyDeleteI wish she had explained cognitive evolution earlier in her summary, however, as for the first paragraph it was a bit hard to understand without this definition. Lilia also could have given examples of what (if any) experiments have worked so far to effectively measure the cognitive capabilities of coldblooded animals.
I had no idea the impact that this area of study could have, and I think Lilia presented it well. I found it interesting that scientists were approaching their research the same way with different types of animals for so long, when in retrospect it seems a simple fix: to not use stimuli that would cause hibernation in coldblooded animals. I enjoyed this article because it is something I would not have read on my own but one that once I started reading, found quite interesting.
After reading the summary of the article “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid,” I now know so much more about reptiles and their intellect. Lilia did a great job at explaining the overall premise of the study in the first couple of sentences. She explains that the article is about correcting preconceived notions that coldblooded reptiles were not nearly as intelligent as mammals. Then, later in the summary, Lilia explains one reason why reptiles are now seen as more intelligent. She talks about multiple experiments that were performed on reptiles that were previously overlooked but now used to prove their intelligence. This explanation causes the claim to be much more clear as to why they are now considered to have more intellect. Finally, I liked how Lilia talked a lot about how why these studies are important for us today. She explains that knowing that a common ancestor is smarter than when had previously thought them to be could change our own notions around our own and other’s evolution.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Lilia provided great detail, her first paragraph became confusing to read, especially in the latter half. It was still very interesting to read, however, it was definitely more difficult to follow. Also, in the last paragraph, Lilia mentions that she loved reading about the small stories that the author included that made it really interesting. It would have been awesome listed one example of a story that was really interesting so we knew what she was talking about.
This may seem like an obvious fact, but I never knew that mammals were used to be seen as far superior to reptiles intellectually. However, it’s so interesting how scientific research can be updated and changed all the time and one thing that you always thought to be true could be disproved any day. Overall, Lilia did a great job and I enjoyed this post.
I thought that Lilia did a great job summarizing the article “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid,” by Emily Anthes. I thought that she wrote the summary very well, with a lot of detail, helping to clearly explain the article. I also liked how Lilia then connected these findings to other experiments, questioning their validity. If such a mistake could be made in this experiment, is it possible that our beliefs about other animals could be incorrect as well? I thought that was a great question and one I definitely would not have thought about. I also liked how Lilia added her opinion at the end of the summary. I thought that was an effective tactic, making it more interesting for the reader. I think that Lilia’s summary would have been even stronger if she had included more quotes from the article. Quotes are a great way to strengthen an argument, and help to makes summaries even stronger and more specific. Another way would have been to give examples of what some of the new successful tests are. I would love to know what the scientists changed in order to gain a response from the cold blooded reptiles. Prior to reading this summary, I was not aware that cold blooded animals were regarded as “stupid”. Lilia clearly showed how this belief was in fact incorrect, as the tests preformed on the animals did not take into account the inherent nature of cold blooded animals.
ReplyDeleteI read Lilia’s summary on the article “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid,” by Emily Anthes. I thought that was written very well and had many details to make it rich thorough, and make the article as clear as possible to the reader. It was very nice how Lilia also connected this to other experiments, questioning validity. For example she says in the summary, “If such a mistake could be made in this experiment, is it possible that our beliefs about other animals could be incorrect as well?” This question was very effective because it makes sure to raise possible questions that should not be ignored. The summary had near to no errors, which made it more clear and easy to understand. The flow of each paragraph was at the right length in that each paragraph was not too long or too short.
ReplyDeleteEven though Lilia had a great overall summary, it became a little confusing towards the end of the first paragraph. It was still intriguing and wonderful to read but the details could have been clearer. I would recommend that Lilia also adds more detail about the animals and their importance. For example, which reptiles did the scientist overlook and how did they perform their new experiment to look at the domain of these animals. The summary would have been improved with a better description on the importance of this discovery.
I was completely unaware of this discovery and I think Lilia explained it very well. It was interesting to learn that scientists were approaching their research the same way with different types of animals for so long. I also liked this article because although I would not read it on my own time it was worth reading and very interesting to learn about this discovery.
After reading Lilia's article, I thought she did a pretty solid job of summarizing, analyzing, and reviewing the information. She gave some good context and background on her topic, so I was able to easily and quickly realize the points that were going to be discussed in the following article/review. In addition, she summarized the successes and failures of scientists researching the topic, such as the problem with using bright lights and sounds to provoke movement in reptiles (which does not work). This is all very nice information to have in an introduction. Lilia also effectively displayed the opposing sides on the debate of intelligence of cold blooded animals. Finally, I thought she did a good job connecting the two fields of mammal studies and reptilian studies, as well as stating the modern day significance of this research.
ReplyDeleteI thought Lilia's second paragraph was sort of confusing, and a little bit long winded. It ultimately said what it needed to say, but it did so in an awkward manner. More specific examples of the successes of scientists in the reptile field would also be nice. Finally, I found one grammatical error- but overall solid review. I found this article topic to be fascinating and am very glad Lilia chose it.
This is something I have often wondered about, and it is refreshing to know there is research being done on the topic. In addition, there could maybe be more practical applications of reptiles that could come out of this research, maybe things like a seeing-eye dog or a bomb sniffing dog could have reptilian counterparts.
I read the review of the article ‘Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid’ by Lillia Briskin. There were three aspects of this article that were particularly well presented. First, I liked how she addressed the fact that there had been a preconceived notion that coldblooded reptiles were not as smart as mammals. This was a smart thing to include because it set the stage for the rest of the critique of the article. Second, I like how she mentioned the idea that all animals could come from a common ancestor because it is something that not a lot of people think about and it also set the stage for the rest of her discussion and was a good biological mention. Third, I like how she mentioned the fact that the way that species go about solving problems is very telling of their evolutionary past. This was good for her to add because it explained how the scientists researched these theories.
ReplyDeleteThere were also two parts of this review that could have been improved. First, there were many grammar mistakes in this piece. It distracted me a bit from reading the actual content and if the grammar would have improved, the flow of the piece would have improved. Second, I wish that she would have critiqued the content of the article a bit more because after reading the article, it became obvious that there were holes in the information that was provided.
The part of this article that was the most interesting was the fact that Lillia mentioned that a lot of scientific studies would need to be redone after this new information was revealed because it was very telling of our past ancestors and the assumptions we made about them without the proper scientific technology.
After reading Lilia’s summary of the article “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid,” I have gained more knowledge about reptiles and their intellectual capacity. Lilia did a great job of explaining the overarching themes of the article in the beginning of the summary. One of the ideas about reptiles that she corrects is that coldblooded reptiles are not as intelligent as mammals. Then, later in the summary, Lilia explains one reason why reptiles are now seen as more intelligent. She mentions several experiments that were performed to substantiate the claim that mammals and cold-blooded reptiles are of comparable intelligence. Finally, I liked how Lilia talked a lot about how why these studies are important for us today. She explains that by knowing that a common ancestor is smarter than what people had previously believe them to be could change our notions about our evolution and the evolution of other species.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things I think could have improved her summary is if she explained the concept of cognitive evolution, as it was difficult to understand the first paragraph without familiarizing the reader with this term. Lilia could have also included quotes from the article in order to fortify her argument, especially with regards to the experiments they performed.
Before reading this summary, the idea that mammals are intellectually superior to cold-blooded reptiles had never occurred to me. I think it is interesting how research and technology can both introduce and disprove theories at any point in time. Overall, I think Lilia wrote a comprehensive summary and I enjoyed it.
Lilia wrote a very intriguing review of the article “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid.” The article is about how scientists have overlooked the cognitive capacity of reptiles. Lilia did a very good job at giving large amounts of detail. This article seems to be based on details. Lilia effectively realized this and included large amounts of detail. Lilia also did a good job with explaining why reptiles must be tested differently from mammals. They react differently to stimuli than mammals. It was effective to utilize this information. Lilia also did a good job with connecting this new research to evolution. It is an interesting connection. I would not have related reptilian reactions to stimuli to evolution.
ReplyDeleteDespite being an interesting review, there are a few things Lilia could have done to make the review better. For example, Lilia could have improved the first paragraph. It gives a lot of information, but not very clearly. At times the wording can seem confusing. Lilia could have also expanded upon the term “freezing.” It seems to be vague. Does freezing just mean they stop moving? Or does their nervous system get affected? Despite these problems, the review is still very well written.
Lilia’s topic was very interesting. I never thought that reptiles were as cognitively enhanced as mammals. I always thought reptiles were much simpler creatures. Lilia’s review brought a new light. It is definitely an interesting read.
I read Lilia’s current event report on the article entitled “Coldblooded Does Not Mean Stupid.” Lilia’s current event report was very well done. She did a good job at summarizing what the article said. She did not leave out key facts. However, she also did not include too much information that would be overwhelming for the reader. She explained the information from the article in a way that was very easy to understand. Also, the blog post included very few grammatical errors. It was clear that Lilia proofed over her work thoroughly to make sure there were no mistakes. In addition, Lilia did a nice job addressing both what the article did well and what it could have improved on. For example, she wrote that she liked how the author “incorporated different stories and examples that tied the whole piece together” but she wishes that “Anthes would have put into context some of the estimated times of evolution, so the effect of this new revelation was more tangible.” Overall, I think that Lilia made the report interesting while providing a nice summary of the article.
ReplyDeleteThe blog contained many good facts and interesting analysis. However, she could have improved the blog comment. For example, Lilia wrote, “now that researchers have learned what type of work needs to be done with reptiles, new advances can be made in this field.” However, she never said what these new advances are. Likewise, I would have liked Lilia to include more direct quotes from the article. In addition, Lilia says that she “loved reading about the small stories that the author included” because it “made it really interesting.” I wish Lilia would have given an example of one of these stories. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the blog since I learned a lot from it concerning this new discovery.
I think that Lilia’s current event report was well done and included many interesting facts. I was surprised that until recently, it was widely thought that cold-blooded reptiles are much less intelligent than mammals. In addition, I thought that it was very interesting how scientific research can be updated and altered at any time. One thing that was expected to be true for a long time could be proven wrong at any moment. Overall, I think that Lilia did a very nice job.