Re: ality

From: Ray Recchia (rrecchia@mail.clarityconnect.com)
Date: Fri Mar 01 2002 - 09:06:18 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: ality"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id JAA11581 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 1 Mar 2002 09:13:32 GMT
    Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20020301035626.00a6b400@mail.clarityconnect.com>
    X-Sender: rrecchia@mail.clarityconnect.com
    X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2
    Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 04:06:18 -0500
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    From: Ray Recchia <rrecchia@mail.clarityconnect.com>
    Subject: Re: ality
    In-Reply-To: <001b01c1c0c1$2dc9b720$8224f4d8@teddace>
    References: <20020227031649.66CAB1FD5A@terri.harvard.edu> <p04320419b8a334db757f@[192.168.2.3]>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    At 05:34 PM 2/28/2002 -0800, you wrote:

    > > >Hi Dace -
    > > >
    > > >>Any data storage system ought to have a minimal level of accuracy far
    > > >>beyond that of human memory.
    > > >
    > > >No argument.
    > > >
    > > >But, who ever said that memory is a data storage system to bring it into
    > > >this comparison?
    > > >
    > > >- Wade
    > >
    > >
    > > Mightn't it be more a record of lessons learned, rather than actual
    > > sensory records? Then the learning would be modified, but the
    > > experiences themselves would be degraded.
    > >
    > > Each new experience would be a sort of software upgrade.
    > >
    > > frankie
    >
    >Our model of memory has to account for the fact that we seem to remember the
    >experiences themselves and not just what we learned from them. Often the
    >learning takes place only in retrospect, after we've recalled the event a
    >few times and mulled it over.
    >
    >Ted

    And therein lies yet another problem with your hypothesis besides the
    location problem, the mechanism problem, the short term vs. long term
    problem and the accounting for brain damage problem. This is that we not
    only remember events, we remember how to do things independent of any
    events at all. If memory came from peering into the past we would only
    remember how to do things by recalling a past time in which we did
    them. As I am typing this sentence I am not remembering how I typed at a
    particular time. I am only remembering how to type. Further I have no
    recollection of the last time I discussed the concept of democracy nor in
    fact can I recall any particular instance off hand in which I discussed
    democracy. However I still remember and understand the concept of
    democracy. Of course since you came up its dark back in time so you only
    peer at the forms using the imagination as explanation for why things are
    remember dimly so I am certain you have an explanation for this as well.

    But all a priori anyway.

    Ray Recchia

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 09:23:47 GMT