Quoting a blurb about an article in Nature, an article which may represent a step toward understanding the mind body connection---
Though i don't have a subscription to Nature, nor could I understand the article probably, my guess is its a very tiny step, because the headlines for any part, typically, of a scientific solution, will grandify the results, which is only apparent when you look at the actual article. That is just how the mind operates. Guess they won't be identifying the part of the brain, where a guess, a step towards progress, ie, any verbal formulation, is taken by the brain to be more significant than it actually is, ---- too soon. What brought my comment up, is the observation that even the title of the article here, is modest. "Involved" rather than "discovered", "explained," .... the usual hyper conclusions typically found in headlines, book titles, etc. This is not a scientific jargon matter, this is the way words work in general. (kind of) -- that is, unavoidably overstating their own, significance. My favorite example, which I am not quoting exactly, is books titles, Like "The Evolution of Consciousness" which you find quickly, is held out by the author or authors, as nothing so definitive. The interesting thing is this blurb is atypically modest---
Rhythmic Firing of Nerves Involved in Body’s Movements
A new model for understanding how nerve cells in the brain control movement may help unlock the secrets of the motor cortex, a critical region that has long resisted scientists’ efforts to understand it, researchers report June 3 in Nature. (Embargo expired on 03-Jun-2012 at 14:00 ET)Nature, June 3—Washington University in St. Louis
My source for the above quotation is --Newswise SciWire for 04-Jun-2012
