Baby Signs are really catching on!

By Rachael Anne -

Comments

  1. Bob Murphy4:26 PM

    Oh wait don't tell me, I remember this one. It means that the recipient needs a diaper change, right?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rachael Anne3:54 PM

    Right now, it's a very trendy parenting thing to teach infants sign language so that they can communicate before they can speak. This photo shows a mother and child doing a sign that I can assure is not in any Baby Signs book. Make more sense now?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wabulon7:10 PM

    Australopithecenes cannot reasonably expect to insert themselves into the flow of time far from where they were conceived.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous7:21 PM

    Trendy? Where?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rachael Anne3:45 PM

    Anon:

    I know of at least 3 separate books demonstrating different methods and signs for parents to use with their babies. Mainstream parenting and pregnancy magazines carry articles favorably describing the practice. If you ask new or expecting parents, chances are they've heard of it, and chances are they know someone who does it/did it with their kids. It's a relatively recent thing. I'd call it trendy, although I doubt it will fade from popularity.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous7:04 PM

    Earlier today my kid asked if he could have a sip from my can of Dr Pepper. I let him take have some.

    He looked up as he handed the can back to me and said, "I know how to make the sign for friends." He made an interlocking gesture with his index fingers.

    I thought this was pretty cool, but I don't know anything about signing. It wasn't trendy when I was a kid.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous7:04 PM

    That was not anonymous, the last quote came from Woody with keyboard butterfingers.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more