Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Is It True That Left-Handed People Are Smarter Than Right-Handed People?: Scientific American

Expand Messages
  • R A Brown
    ... OOPS!! That s a sin of omission, if ever there was one :( Mea maxima culpa! (Send penance off-line) -- Ray ==================================
    Message 1 of 21 , Sep 2, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      On 02/09/2013 16:19, C. Brickner wrote:
      >> I didn't remember about the Catholic thing. Otherwise,
      >> for years I've conformed to three of those epithets.
      >> Nowadays only to two of them :P.
      >
      > IIRC the 'Catholic' bit got there partly because of JRRT
      > and because there were (presumably still are) quite a
      > few Catholics among those who actively post to the list.
      > Also IIRC Fr Schleyer, the inventor of Volapük had
      > something to do with it. Coincidentally the inventor of
      > the earliest mixed-type conlang was that of the French
      > Jesuit priest, Philippe Labbé, published in 1663:
      > http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Outis/index.html
      > ________________________________________________
      >
      > And let's not forget St. Hildegard! :-)

      OOPS!!

      That's a sin of omission, if ever there was one :(

      Mea maxima culpa!

      (Send penance off-line)

      --
      Ray
      ==================================
      http://www.carolandray.plus.com
      ==================================
      "language … began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
      for individual beings and events."
      [Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
    • Matthew George
      On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
      Message 2 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
        tsela.cg@...> wrote:

        > Okay, before this nonsense gets spread even further


        It's a very robust finding, highly replicated. If you can't deal with the
        facts of reality, don't try to muddy the waters for those who wish to.

        >

        > Nope. There's just no evidence of that. All the issues that have ever been
        > noticed can be easily explained by influences of the environment *after
        > birth*.


        That is an outright lie.

        Matt G.
      • Padraic Brown
        ... I just tried that as well — much more legible than my right handed script. Though I have to admit to not quite being able to sort out where to start (or
        Message 3 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Roger Mills wrote:
          > Just a little side-note:  years ago (still in grade school) I
          > discovered that I could write backwards in script with my left
          > hand, and it was quite legible (though I needed to use a mirror
          > to read it, bah)-- much moreso than writing backwards with my
          > right hand. I thought that a little odd...... Haven't tried it
          > in years, however-- well, I  just did, and it looked like a
          > drunken chicken had walked across the page.........
          I just tried that as well — much more legible than my right handed script. Though I have to admit to not
          quite being able to sort out where to start (or stop!) writing my small As and Os... I feel like getting lost
          at Dupont Circle and not quite knowing where to get off!

          For Ray and Charlie:

          Yes indeed about St. Hildegard, though I don't know about her being left or right handed. Maybe our dear
          Sally knows. Quite the Hildegard expert her.

          And as for the Catholic bit, Ray, I never heard that before your message in this thread. I'd always known
          it as gay, bearded, left handed and Lithuanian. I do believe there must have been a rather large contingent
          of Lithuanian conlagners on the list at the time. Perhaps as many as one. Maybe even an astonishing pair

          of them!

          As for the original post:

          Even in the World, many philosophers recognise different kinds or domains of intelligence. Two common
          threads being native and acquired, so basically common sense vs. book learning. To my knowledge, no
          one connects handedness with intelligence. I am not certain what the relative percentages of left v. right
          handedness are among Men — could be quite different from *here*. I know Daine are predominantly
          left handed (and for that matter, their whole anatomy is levo-oriented in general, though some sets of twins are
          mirror oriented, one levo-, one dextro-).


          As for any real or imagined correlations between handedness and other health issues, I am sure that the
          state of medicine and general "science" in the World can not allow any kind of definitive yea or nay.


          Padraic
        • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
          ... No, sorry, you re the one muddying the waters by spreading such charlatanism around. There are no such findings that stand up to any kind of actual
          Message 4 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            On 3 September 2013 19:29, Matthew George <matt.msg@...> wrote:

            > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
            > tsela.cg@...> wrote:
            >
            > > Okay, before this nonsense gets spread even further
            >
            >
            > It's a very robust finding, highly replicated. If you can't deal with the
            > facts of reality, don't try to muddy the waters for those who wish to.
            >
            >
            No, sorry, you're the one muddying the waters by spreading such
            charlatanism around. There are no such findings that stand up to any kind
            of actual scrutiny. You're disappointing me for believing otherwise.


            >
            > That is an outright lie.
            >
            >
            Stop trying to defend your prejudice.

            I will not accept being called a liar on this list. This thread is now
            poisoned by nonsense and I will not participate in it any more. Unless I
            get an apology, don't expect me to ever reply to one of your posts or try
            to correct your mistakes again.
            --
            Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

            http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
            http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
          • Matthew George
            On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
            Message 5 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
              tsela.cg@...> wrote:

              > Unless I get an apology, don't expect me to ever reply to one of your
              > posts or try
              > to correct your mistakes again.
              >

              I'll hold you to that. Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets swears never to again
              respond to my posts, everyone! Remember!

              To sum up: left-handedness is known to be statistically associated with
              early neurological insult and developmental abnormality. Association isn't
              transitive, and it's perfectly possible to be otherwise completely healthy
              and normal while being left-handed. Because of trauma to the nervous system
              increasing the chance that a person's dominant side will be reversed,
              however, some of the well-known health and longevity associations with
              being left-handed are best explained by problems with physiology rather
              than as the consequences of unapt design and social stigma. Therefore, it
              is entirely likely that overall left-handers can be expected to perform
              less well on tests of cognitive performance than right-handers; excluding
              cases of neurological insult would probably eliminate this effect, in the
              same way that not including people with Down's Syndrome in an attempt to
              see if epicanthic folds had any statistical effect on intelligence would.

              Matt G.
            • Andrew Schade
              O Keefe just a lurker, but it seems that this thread has gone beyond a civil discussion of intellectual topics so it probably needs to just stop, before
              Message 6 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                O'Keefe just a lurker, but it seems that this thread has gone beyond a
                civil discussion of intellectual topics so it probably needs to just stop,
                before tempers rise much more.
                On Sep 3, 2013 7:00 PM, "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" <tsela.cg@...>
                wrote:

                > On 3 September 2013 19:29, Matthew George <matt.msg@...> wrote:
                >
                > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
                > > tsela.cg@...> wrote:
                > >
                > > > Okay, before this nonsense gets spread even further
                > >
                > >
                > > It's a very robust finding, highly replicated. If you can't deal with
                > the
                > > facts of reality, don't try to muddy the waters for those who wish to.
                > >
                > >
                > No, sorry, you're the one muddying the waters by spreading such
                > charlatanism around. There are no such findings that stand up to any kind
                > of actual scrutiny. You're disappointing me for believing otherwise.
                >
                >
                > >
                > > That is an outright lie.
                > >
                > >
                > Stop trying to defend your prejudice.
                >
                > I will not accept being called a liar on this list. This thread is now
                > poisoned by nonsense and I will not participate in it any more. Unless I
                > get an apology, don't expect me to ever reply to one of your posts or try
                > to correct your mistakes again.
                > --
                > Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
                >
                > http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
                > http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
                >
              • Andrew Schade
                Darned autocorrect on my phone.. I meant to start that with I m
                Message 7 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  Darned autocorrect on my phone.. I meant to start that with "I'm"
                  On Sep 3, 2013 7:36 PM, "Andrew Schade" <schade.andrew.l@...> wrote:

                  > O'Keefe just a lurker, but it seems that this thread has gone beyond a
                  > civil discussion of intellectual topics so it probably needs to just stop,
                  > before tempers rise much more.
                  > On Sep 3, 2013 7:00 PM, "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" <
                  > tsela.cg@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >> On 3 September 2013 19:29, Matthew George <matt.msg@...> wrote:
                  >>
                  >> > On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 3:25 AM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
                  >> > tsela.cg@...> wrote:
                  >> >
                  >> > > Okay, before this nonsense gets spread even further
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> > It's a very robust finding, highly replicated. If you can't deal with
                  >> the
                  >> > facts of reality, don't try to muddy the waters for those who wish to.
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> No, sorry, you're the one muddying the waters by spreading such
                  >> charlatanism around. There are no such findings that stand up to any kind
                  >> of actual scrutiny. You're disappointing me for believing otherwise.
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> >
                  >> > That is an outright lie.
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >> Stop trying to defend your prejudice.
                  >>
                  >> I will not accept being called a liar on this list. This thread is now
                  >> poisoned by nonsense and I will not participate in it any more. Unless I
                  >> get an apology, don't expect me to ever reply to one of your posts or try
                  >> to correct your mistakes again.
                  >> --
                  >> Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
                  >>
                  >> http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
                  >> http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
                  >>
                  >
                • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                  ... I never swore anything. I just said not to expect it. Doesn t stop me from doing it *if I want to*. If you cannot understand such a simple distinction, no
                  Message 8 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 4 September 2013 00:20, Matthew George <matt.msg@...> wrote:

                    > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets <
                    > tsela.cg@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > > Unless I get an apology, don't expect me to ever reply to one of your
                    > > posts or try
                    > > to correct your mistakes again.
                    > >
                    >
                    > I'll hold you to that. Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets swears never to again
                    > respond to my posts, everyone! Remember!
                    >
                    >
                    I never swore anything. I just said not to expect it. Doesn't stop me from
                    doing it *if I want to*. If you cannot understand such a simple
                    distinction, no wonder you believe all the nonsense you're spouting.


                    > To sum up: left-handedness is known to be statistically associated with
                    > early neurological insult and developmental abnormality. Association isn't
                    > transitive, and it's perfectly possible to be otherwise completely healthy
                    > and normal while being left-handed. Because of trauma to the nervous system
                    > increasing the chance that a person's dominant side will be reversed,
                    > however, some of the well-known health and longevity associations with
                    > being left-handed are best explained by problems with physiology rather
                    > than as the consequences of unapt design and social stigma. Therefore, it
                    > is entirely likely that overall left-handers can be expected to perform
                    > less well on tests of cognitive performance than right-handers; excluding
                    > cases of neurological insult would probably eliminate this effect, in the
                    > same way that not including people with Down's Syndrome in an attempt to
                    > see if epicanthic folds had any statistical effect on intelligence would.
                    >
                    >
                    All of this can be summarised with one word: rubbish. There is absolutely
                    no evidence that neural trauma can lead to changes in laterality
                    preferentially from right to left, and the effects of social stigma have
                    been seriously underestimated by researchers. I know no single study that
                    correctly tried to account for the effects of social stigma and design
                    preferentially made for right-handed people. None. In each and every one of
                    them, those are just handwaved. Well sorry, but handwaves are not good
                    science. Just because nobody can bring themselves to believe that nurture
                    effects can be so strong, and that prejudice can have such an influence on
                    people's development doesn't mean it doesn't happen. And as long as nobody
                    seriously tries to look into those effects, the research on this subject
                    will simply be unbelievable.

                    I can't believe I'm having to have this conversation! What is this, the
                    50's? Are left-handed people the new homosexuals? Do I have to point out
                    the mass of "research" that showed incontrovertibly that homosexuality was
                    a disease associated with all kinds of development issues, until
                    researchers started to let go of their prejudice and realised that all that
                    research was pure nonsense? Yes, all that peer-reviewed, statistically
                    significant research? What's the difference here? No, let me answer that
                    for you: none. There's no difference. All that body of research can be
                    thrown away, just like the body of research that showed without a doubt
                    that gays should be put in institutions was thrown away. It's that simple.
                    And I will keep saying that, until the prejudice is gone.
                    --
                    Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

                    http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
                    http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
                  • Matthew George
                    A simple internet search - not even delving into journals of medicine or neurology - quickly demonstrates that you don t have the slightest idea what you re
                    Message 9 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      A simple internet search - not even delving into journals of medicine or
                      neurology - quickly demonstrates that you don't have the slightest idea
                      what you're talking about. And you didn't even have the integrity to keep
                      to your promise not to respond to me ever again. Tsk tsk.

                      If you want to make the case that left-handed people are just as bright and
                      healthy as right-handed ones, your personal behavior is hardly helping.

                      We now return to the topic of constructed languages.

                      Matt G.
                    • Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
                      ... Because *you* are the world s expert on these issues, right? Rather than a sad victim of confirmation bias. ... Where did I promise anything? Point out
                      Message 10 of 21 , Sep 3, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 4 September 2013 01:05, Matthew George <matt.msg@...> wrote:

                        > A simple internet search - not even delving into journals of medicine or
                        > neurology - quickly demonstrates that you don't have the slightest idea
                        > what you're talking about.


                        Because *you* are the world's expert on these issues, right? Rather than a
                        sad victim of confirmation bias.


                        > And you didn't even have the integrity to keep
                        > to your promise not to respond to me ever again. Tsk tsk.
                        >
                        >
                        Where did I promise anything? Point out where I said: "I promise to never
                        respond to you again". You won't find it. If I don't say "I promise", then
                        I don't promise anything. It's reading comprehension 101.


                        > If you want to make the case that left-handed people are just as bright and
                        > healthy as right-handed ones, your personal behavior is hardly helping.
                        >
                        >
                        Yeah, please resort to ad hominems, that really helps your case. this is
                        really over the line here. You don't know me. You don't know what I do. And
                        you certainly have no idea how bright and healthy I am (probably more than
                        you'll ever be, in both cases). So don't start here, as you'll lose for
                        sure.


                        > We now return to the topic of constructed languages.
                        >
                        >
                        Please do, not that you've ever had anything worthy to say on that subject.
                        --
                        Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.

                        http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
                        http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.