Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: "^@%>---*=#" <yomama@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 01:43:42 -0400
"Bill Pfeifer" <billpfeifer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:mNmdndoM6K830oTVnZ2dnUVZ_jGdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
^@%>---*=# wrote:
"Bill Pfeifer" <billpfeifer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:UvCdnb47ic0OnoTVnZ2dnUVZ_rmjnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
^@%>---*=# wrote:
"Bill Pfeifer" <billpfeifer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:64-dnb-hzPYXEorVnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
^@%>---*=# wrote:
"Bill Pfeifer" <billpfeifer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:LaydnWv8-qwa-IjVnZ2dnUVZ_o6knZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
^@%>---*=# wrote:
where do you put a memory
how do you find it later
why does it sometimes change
An idea inspired by Chapter 29 of "The Restaurant at the End
of the Universe":
What if there is no such thing as memory?
What if the brain simply constructs a "past" that completely
explains the discrepancy between one's immediate physical
sensations and one's state of mind?
That as you dig into this "past", the brain simply generates
"history" that is completely internally consistent?
There would be no way to tell if that is the case.
imagine memory to be like walking
in a dark forest and dropping bread
crumbs to find your way back. the
bread crumbs are electromagnetic
and chemical expressions of the
energies that form when you are
impressed with something and leave
your bread crumb trail to trace back
again a vibrational path which is not
only initiated by feelings but also
re-called by similar feelings. since
a feeling won't be exactly the same
vibrationally when you recall it,
memories can tend to fade away or
change content.
That's the standard model, which assumes that memory is real.
But what about if memory is "made up" in realtime?
I mean, *all* of it.
There would be no way to tell.
made up by what ?
Made up by the brain.
Now I'm not saying "it is", but "what if"
Let's say there is no memory storage at all.
Your sense organs send signals to the brain.
Your brain is in a certain "state of mind".
It concocts a "history" that pretends to be a stored memory,
which "makes sense" of the signals from the sense organs
and accounts for the current state of mind. As you
"reflect" on the past, the brain simply makes up more
and more "past memory". And since it is the brain that
makes it up, it would be completely self-consistent.
If any doubts about the reality of memory were to arise,
the brain would simply make up a past experience where you
checked certain facts with other people and received
confirmation, thus "proving" that memory is real.
Again, I'm not saying this is the case, but I can't find
any logical holes in this conjecture that would make it
impossible.
a shared experience between two people
couldn't be contrived by one brain only
Any "sharing" is in the past.
The only way you can assume that the experience
was real and was shared is to assume that the memory
of it is real.
If your brain just made that experience up, how could
you possibly know that the other person has the same
"memory"?
If you were to ask them, their answer would be just
another memory. If your brain just made up *that*
"memory", how could you tell?
Just think this through with the assumption that
there is *no* stored memory. Logical problems only
arise if there is an (unconscious, perhaps) assumption
that *some* memories are real records of the past.
you talk to the other person
in present moment. when they
remember the same memory
your scenario falls apart.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: Bill Pfeifer
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: Uncle Weasel
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: Dave K
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- References:
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: Bill Pfeifer
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: ^@%>---*=#
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- From: Bill Pfeifer
- Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- Prev by Date: Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- Next by Date: Orange colour and objectivity
- Previous by thread: Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- Next by thread: Re: simply not girlcottingly acceptable
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|