About the only thing I could relate to this is a certain ambiguity in certain activities at an early age, eg, 
in some activities my left hand was the stronger one; there was also an experiment I performed on 
myself after my TBI in 1988 - recalling Cousteau's comment - "You've got two hands - use them!" - I 
attempted to teach myself to use my left hand in writing as freely as my right. It has had an interesting 
effect - sometimes I'll become aware of my left side as the dominant one - but that does not last long.

I would not mind continuing the relateralization experiment, if I could be guaranteed proper 
neuropsychological accessment of states before, during and after, but this is New Zealand I am living 
in, and Karl Popper was distinctly unimpressed with the research tradition in New Zealand universities 
during his stay between 1937 and 1945 ...

Wesley Parish

Quoting Sam Stutter <[log in to unmask]>:

> Exactly what I was thinking.
> (Leftie, never-did-an-IQ-test but did do one of the replacements for the
> IQ test, right footed, right handed for sports except those which
> involve weapons of any kind, right-handed when punching, left handed
> when getting dressed, etc, etc). De-facto left handed due to right-side
> being the one which gets epileptic all the time.
> Anyway, I suspect there's a degree of confirmation bias here. We all
> know that da Vinci was left handed and left handedness occurs in 10% of
> people. We remember cleverness and left handedness together because
> they're both noticeable qualities, whereas we don't remember right
> handedness or being dumb :-P
> I recall the urban myth among British (and probably other countries')
> emergency services. It is widely believed that your average citizen
> tends to go a bit crazy when there's a full moon, meaning that the
> police, ambulance and fire services are extra busy.
> A scientific study was carried out which revealed that there was no
> spike in activity during full moons. Policemen, etc had simply recalled
> that, on busy nights, they had looked up at the sky and seen a full
> moon. They had forgotten all those times they had looked up and not seen
> a full moon and when they weren't busy they hadn't looked at the sky.
> Furthermore, something resembling a full moon can be seen in the sky for
> at least 4 days every lunar month.
> The same is probably true for left-right clever-dumb dichotomy. It's
> perhaps noticeable that the moon thing and left-handedness are 1/8 and
> 1/10 respectively. The brain notices patterns which simply aren't
> there.
> The same is true for the right-left brain analytic-artistic dichotomy.
> They all appeal to a long-standing western tradition of "polar
> opposites" like male-female, good-evil, summer-winter, etc, which all
> appeared because the ancient Greeks were sometimes a little lazy in
> their thinking.
> Also, hasn't the IQ test been debunked? I also think I recall the
> "emotional intelligence" and "kinaesthetic/visual/audio learning styles"
> were also declared to be nonsense. What matters is not some latent
> quality of intelligence, but how you deploy your available brain power
> and in what sphere of intelligence. There is so little we actually
> understand about the brain we must always be wary of people who say they
> have some universal truth about all human brains. 
> On 2 Sep 2013, at 08:25, Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > On 2 September 2013 00:24, Matthew George <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > 
> >> Left-handedness is also statistically associated with abnormalities
> in
> >> development; not all lefties have such problems, but people with
> those
> >> problems are far more likely to be lefties.
> > Okay, before this nonsense gets spread even further, let me warn that
> all
> > such statistical surveys have all failed to take into account the
> amount of
> > stress and down right abuse that lefties have to go through every day.
> As a
> > leftie myself, I can tell you that even in our Western society, the
> stigma
> > against left-handedness is still very strong, and abuse is still very
> real.
> > It doesn't have to be overt like punishing children who "dare" to want
> to
> > write with their left hand (something that actually still happens
> nowadays)
> > to still happen. Left-handed children are more likely to be bullied
> than
> > right-handed children for instance. Associated with the daily stress
> of a
> > world that strongly right-lateralised as ours, it's little wonder
> that
> > left-handed people will experience problems.
> > 
> > 
> >> It's thought that the signals which guide development can be
> disrupted by
> >> stress or illness on the part of the fetus; alternatively, some have
> >> suggested that messing up one developmental step throws those that
> follow
> >> it out of whack. Whatever the reason, this means that being
> left-handed is
> >> associated with much higher rates of health problems, and probably
> subtly
> >> or overtly impaired cognition.
> > 
> > 
> > Nonsense. There has never been a single study that managed to
> separate
> > possible effects of development inside the foetus from possible
> effects of
> > development after birth. All the studies I've read on those have
> failed on
> > that point. And why shouldn't they? It's difficult to make unbiased
> studies
> > when the world we live in is so biased already.
> > 
> > 
> >> It's entirely possible for the process
> >> which determines which side is favored to be altered without
> affecting or
> >> disrupting anything else, but that isn't the way it always happens,
> and
> >> that changes the overall statistical associations.
> > 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*. Why do people always try so hard to minimise the influence of
> the
> > environment, and try to pin issues lefties have to their own
> development?
> > Could it be because otherwise they would have to face the
> uncomfortable
> > idea that our society is still negatively treating left-handed people,
> and
> > this has a strong influence on their well-being? Doesn't that sound
> like
> > blaming the victim to you?
> > 
> > 
> >> I suspect that if you looked only at people who didn't have
> additional
> >> problems, you wouldn't find any different between left-handers and
> >> right-handers.
> > Not sure about that. I did notice as I was studying that the higher
> level I
> > studied, the higher the proportion of left-handed people. When I
> studied in
> > the ESPCI (a Grande École, and one of the most elite "universities"
> of
> > France), I did notice that the proportion of left-handed people in my
> > promotion was much higher than average (about 20 people out of a
> promotion
> > of 72, i.e. about 27% rather than the average 15%). Not sure if it's
> > meaningful though (anecdote is not data), nor what the cause would
> be.
> > 
> > 
> >> Matt "IQ unknown" G.
> > 
> > According to the latest test I took (a few years ago), I'm at MENSA
> level.
> > Not that I think it's meaningful in the least...
> > 
> > On 2 September 2013 09:12, R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> > 
> >> What about those people who are truly ambidextrous? I
> >> recall from long, long years ago when I was at school that
> >> some of the classrooms had blackboards that stretched the
> >> whole length of the wall. One such room was the domain of
> >> the Head of Classics; he would begin writing on the board
> >> with his left hand and then, about midway along, change the
> >> chalk to his right hand and continue writing.
> > Yeah, like those "studies" of the past that proved beyond doubt that
> > homosexuality was a disease, the studies around left-handedness tend
> to
> > forget the existence of ambidextrous people of all kinds. Not only
> truly
> > ambidextrous people like the prof you describe, but also people with
> > different laterality depending on the activity. The most common case
> is
> > people doing everything with their left hand but writing (typical in
> > societies where writing with your left hand is "corrected"), but
> other
> > cases exist: my younger sister, for instance, is left-handed for
> writing,
> > but right-handed in sports and other activities, something that
> always
> > surprised her teachers :). I've always wondered if she learned to
> write
> > with her left hand purely because she saw me do it that way (for the
> > record, both my parents are right-handed), but what's strange in this
> case
> > is that there's never been any coercion whatsoever, which is usually
> needed
> > to get people to learn to write with their non-dominant hand.
> > 
> > 
> >> But I thought it had been established on this list many,
> >> many moons ago that the typical conlanger was left-handed,
> >> gay, Catholic, Lithuanian and sported a goatee beard :)
> >> 
> >> Alas, I conform to only one of those epithets ;)
> > 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.
> > -- 
> > Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
> > 
> >
> >