Is it because this information is considered unimportant? Hardly; it’s probably the only functional association you will find in every course and every book on the brain.
This isn’t my experience at all, unless I’m misunderstanding your meaning. In my cog sci class we studied the associated anatomy for psychopathology, ADHD, dyslexia and probably a couple others I can’t think of, but I don’t remember anything about Wernicke’s or Broca’s areas.
Possibly not; this 2006 paper on Broca’s area by a renowned expert does not mention it. (In its defense, it references many other studies in which damage to Broca’s area is associated with language deficits.)
I go to Georgetown and I’m involved with the Cog Sci program. If I have time I’ll go ask Professor Ullman about this. :-)
Oh, dear. Providing specific examples is a risky business. I still haven’t figured out a safe way to discuss a field without making myself less welcome to some of its members.
I was just adding a data point to the pile of evidence. Don’t infer motivations or allegiances. I think your general point is insightful and don’t think of myself as a member of the field.
This isn’t my experience at all, unless I’m misunderstanding your meaning. In my cog sci class we studied the associated anatomy for psychopathology, ADHD, dyslexia and probably a couple others I can’t think of, but I don’t remember anything about Wernicke’s or Broca’s areas.
I go to Georgetown and I’m involved with the Cog Sci program. If I have time I’ll go ask Professor Ullman about this. :-)
Oh, dear. Providing specific examples is a risky business. I still haven’t figured out a safe way to discuss a field without making myself less welcome to some of its members.
I was just adding a data point to the pile of evidence. Don’t infer motivations or allegiances. I think your general point is insightful and don’t think of myself as a member of the field.