Final answer:
The opposing viewpoint on Davis' specific mouth movements argues that these movements may not be a reliable indicator of a person's true intentions or emotions, as they can be consciously controlled or influenced by external factors.
Step-by-step explanation:
The opposing viewpoint regarding specific mouth movements in Davis' argument might argue that these movements are not indicative of a person's true intentions or emotions.
They may believe that facial expressions and mouth movements can be consciously controlled or faked, and therefore, should not be used as a reliable measure of someone's thoughts or feelings.
For example, research by Soussignan (2002) suggests that the Duchenne smile, also known as a genuine smile, can elicit emotional experiences and autonomic reactivity.
However, the opposing viewpoint may argue that these findings are not conclusive evidence and that factors such as social conditioning and personal motivations can influence facial expressions.
In conclusion, the opposing viewpoint of Davis' argument on specific mouth movements challenges their validity as a reliable indicator of internal thoughts and emotions. This perspective argues that facial expressions and mouth movements can be consciously controlled or influenced by external factors, casting doubt on their accuracy.