Until fairly recently, the mysteries of the left-handed seemed to be unsolvable, like the true value of the cubit, or the location of the Ark of the Covenant, or King Solomon’s cache of gold. But it was breakthroughs in neurosurgery that discerned the differing personalities of the two lobes of the brain; the right side side speech and rational thought, and the left, non-verbal,highly musical, and seems to house our visual understanding. It is, in a sense, non rational, and feels rather than thinks. Significantly, the two lobes compete with each other, especially in childhood, and around the age of ten one of them will rise to dominance.
(see link at end)…Now two researchers from the University of Montpellier have found evidence to support this controversial idea. They believe that the more violence there is in a pre-industrial society, the greater the advantage of being left-handed. Charlotte Faurie and Michel Raymond compared homicide rates, which includes murders and executions, in eight native societies around the world, from the Inuit of the Arctic to the Yanamamo indians of the Amazon. They found that as this measure of violent aggression increased in each society, so did the proportion of men who are left-handed. Read More:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/you-cannot-be-serious–are-lefthanded-people-natures-way-of-starting-a-fight-6156385.html
The majority, the righties, whose speaking/rational lobe is in command, tend to think logically; conversely, the left-handers exhibit more intuitive behavior. If this is indeed a true reading, left handed nuttiness isn’t wrong handedness but wrong headedness, meaning they shouldn’t be expected to read or spell well, study math, or become lawyers. Instead they should be musicians, abstract expressionists, and baseball players. Married couples in inter-handed unions should recognize that one’s partner’s inability to appreciate music or pick up his socks may be explained in part, by handedness, and by extension, psychotherapists should be able to cut their treatment time in half.
Of course, none of this will happen. The right-handers are too much in control to give a damn, and the left-handers are too unorganized and unorganizable, to do anything about it. Still, its comfort for them to know what has long been suspected to be true. They are a different breed of cat.
(see link at end)…A series of studies led by psychologist Daniel Casasanto suggests that one thing that may shape our choice is the side of the menu an item appears on. Specifically, Casasanto and his team have shown that for left-handers, the left side of any space connotes positive qualities such as goodness, niceness, and smartness. For right-handers, the right side of any space connotes these same virtues. He calls this idea that “people with different bodies think differently, in predictable ways” the body-specificity hypothesis.
In one of Casasanto’s experiments, adult participants were shown pictures of two aliens side by side and instructed to circle the alien that best exemplified an abstract characteristic. For example, participants may have been asked to circle the “more attractive” or “less honest” alien. Of the participants who showed a directional preference (most participants did), the majority of right-handers attributed posi
characteristics more often to the aliens on the right whereas the majority of left-handers attributed positive characteristics more often to aliens on the left. Read More:http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-hand-you-favor-shapes-moral-space
(see link at end)… Finally, Lombroso provides a bridge from the historic stigmatisation of left-handedness to the claims of 20th-century and now 21st-century researchers that left-handedness increases health risks. Lombroso’s connection of left-sidedness with feeble-mindedness and insanity and left-handedness with criminality has had great resilience as it has been repackaged and relabelled in contemporary and current scientific discourses.
Although these claims never disappeared, they gained new force in the 1980s and 1990s in the highly publicised studies of Norman Geschwind and his colleagues and those of Stanley Coren and his collaborators. These researchers connected left-handedness with an array of disorders, including autoimmune diseases, psychiatric disorders, mental retardation, and learning disabilities. In addition, Coren and colleagues claimed that left-handers on average died 9—10 years younger than right-handers. Although the findings of Geschwind and Coren are controversial, the connection between left-handedness and developmental disorders and mental illness remains very much alive in current investigations. Because a number of studies have also argued that, as a population, some left-handers display exceptional intellectual talents, left-handedness is often seen as conferring a bimodal impact.
Albeit in less inflated and judgmental language, Lombroso’s general claims about the pathology of left-handedness persist. Acknowledging this is not an endorsement of Lombroso’s methods or conclusions, for clearly they reflected deep prejudices and unexamined assumptions about human differences. Much of what Lombroso wrote about left-handedness or, for that matter, human behaviours was informed by widely held cultural assumptions of the larger intellectual world he inhabited. From today’s perspective, what appeared in Lombroso’s time as science would be characterised as racist and sexist ideology. Read More:http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(11)60009-3/fulltext