The act of hand gesturing might have little do with biology or psychology, more of a social construct. With the purpose to add value, efficiency, persuasion into a persons communication. Humans respond to visuals along with sound. The type and motions of the gesturing itself might have some biology and psychology involved.
EddieZilker
quote:
Originally posted by Kismet7
The act of hand gesturing might have little do with biology or psychology, more of a social construct. With the purpose to add value, efficiency, persuasion into a persons communication. Humans respond to visuals along with sound. The type of gesturing itself might have some biology and psychology involved.
quote:
Originally posted by jennypie
Well duh. :p
Silky Johnson
:stongue: :stongue:
igottaknow
quote:
Originally posted by Kismet7
The act of hand gesturing might have little do with biology or psychology, more of a social construct. With the purpose to add value, efficiency, persuasion into a persons communication. Humans respond to visuals along with sound. The type and motions of the gesturing itself might have some biology and psychology involved.
tell that to a deaf person
Kismet7
quote:
Originally posted by Kismet7
The act of hand gesturing might have little do with biology or psychology, more of a social construct. With the purpose to add value, efficiency, persuasion into a persons communication. Humans respond to visuals along with sound. The type and motions of the gesturing itself might have some biology and psychology involved.
To add to this...I dont think hand gesturing has much to do with intelligence. You could say the people who gesture more have knowledge in the importance of gesturing while communicating. And they can do this whether they are smart or dumb, since gesturing is simple physical motions any human can learn and apply into their communication.
Silky Johnson
Wow, thank you for saying what I already implied in my first post and what has been elaborated on in this thread before you came.
Kismet7
quote:
Originally posted by jennypie
Wow, thank you for saying what I already implied in my first post and what has been elaborated on in this thread before you came.
quote:
Bear with me, I'm not as articulate as some of you s.
Cultural influences on communication aside, I was wondering whether there was a correlation between intelligence and use or non-use of expressive non-verbal communication.
On one hand, I think that a person who gesticulates a lot and makes very overt facial expressions might be showing greater intelligence, in a kinesthetic sense. In a way I can see this type of person being more wholly in tune with what they think and feel.
But on the other hand, does it not show a different type of intelligence to be able to express more, with less?
This applies to not only the sender of the message, but the receiver, too. To be able to perceive more on less information seems, uh, smarter?
I thought about this with words, too...and the ironic fact that to be able to communicate with less words, one actually has to know a whole load of 'em.
I suppose this all depends on how one defines intelligence, but I'm not looking to get into a debate about that, either.
Anyway, as I thought of this, I made it seem perfectly logical in my mind that we should be able to communicate telepathically. Right? RIGHT??
You asked a question, made an assumption, and then you asked another question tying gesturing to intelligence. How does your OP make the points I made?
ps: You mad? :p
Flec
"This applies to not only the sender of the message, but the receiver, too. To be able to perceive more on less information seems, uh, smarter?"
smarter or more intelligent? no
telepathic? absolutely
more on less? whether your getting information verbally or non-verbally it needs to be full enough that any ambiguities are resolved.
