• Which of the "important questions about the evolution of the human mind and brain" did you guys find most interesting? They start on page 118—RA

• Pg 118: what do you make of Richard Dawkins likening teaching creationism to teaching that the sun revolves around the earth?—BH

• Bottom 118-Top 119. What do you guys think of his first big question that has gone unanswered about human brain development? Why did we become so dominant if the things we considered about us to be so advanced over other species didn't appear for 225,000 years after our existence?—KW

• Bottom of pg 119, Why are we humans so good at reading one another's intentions?—ER

• The essay says that the reason for the evolution of language is obvious, more so than humor, art, dancing, and music. Why do you think we as humans developed those things? (pg. 120)—JB

• On page 124, the author states that: "Anytime you watch someone doing something, the neurons that your brain would use to do the same thing become active - as if you were doing it." Moreover, what he also means in the previous paragraph is that if you see someone in pain, you will react to it as well. Therefore, if we try to harm someone, the neurons will probably react as if the action is done on you. Why is there crime if you would probably feel the same when you do harm on others?—KT

• Based on page 124, where the author discusses about literally feeling someone else's pain, does that imply that neurons may be the reason we feel sympathy and pain when we see those we love hurt?—SC

• My question comes from page 124, paragraph 2. Ramachandran writes of the empathetic response of neurons. Why is this trait beneficial to the "fitness" of our species? Are there any connections between this empathetic response and human morality?—CD

• Throughout the reading, the author takes a rather detached, scientific view as to the development of culture in humanity. However, I noticed he doesn't say whether or not free will is essential. He mentions it at the bottom of 124 and the top of 125, but all he says is that he thinks that someone w/brain damage would be susceptible to mirror neuron influence. What do we think? Can memory neurons explain everything, or does free will need to be included in the author's considerations?—KM

• On p.125-126, Ramachandran talks about null signals. Do you think the tests used on the amputee could yield the same results with a paraplegic or quadriplegic?—SM

• To determine if "sexy" mirror-neurons functions (the process of imitating an action on instinct) are working at birth, He mentions repeating the baby-mother face experiment (page 128 top). What do you believe would be the result? Would the baby imitate a non-stereotypical action?—JP