tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9048879464910781933.post6321623830220626587..comments2023-10-12T00:25:24.119-07:00Comments on Talking Brains: Rizzolatti & Craighero (2004): Class discussion summary #6 (relation between hand and mouth)Greg Hickokhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16656473495682901613noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9048879464910781933.post-41407801647344378952008-05-02T16:02:00.000-07:002008-05-02T16:02:00.000-07:00The size relation was the speculative part, but as...The size relation was the speculative part, but associations between hand and mouth are certainly established even if you do always eat with a fork. <BR/><BR/>Probably a better argument for hand/mouth association comes from the literature on language-related manual gesture. <BR/><BR/>No matter what though, just because two systems are associated doesn't mean they share a neural (evolutionary) basis. It just means they've been associatively linked. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the comment.Greg Hickokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16656473495682901613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9048879464910781933.post-8355701522569593262008-05-02T15:52:00.000-07:002008-05-02T15:52:00.000-07:00I usually eat with a fork -- whether it's overload...I usually eat with a fork -- whether it's overloaded or daintily speared, my grip is uniform, so lip aperture adjusts while grip stauys uniform. I think this is the case at least as often as the case Drew describes, plus, in the developmental stages, kids get bite-sized bits to reduce the choking hazard. So, it's a nice sounding idea, but I'm not convinced.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com