RE: New Scientist on memory

From: joedees@bellsouth.net
Date: Fri 30 May 2003 - 18:18:46 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T. Smith: "Re: New Scientist on memory"

    > Recalled from what?
    >
    > Lawry
    >
    From the morphically resonant woo-woo zone, of course! ;~)
    >
    > > Though the author himself doesn't seem to realize it, the
    > > evidence discussed
    > > in this article abolishes the notion that the brain alone is
    > > responsible for
    > > memory. Every time we recall something, the relevant memory trace
    > > in the brain is completely erased and then "reconstituted" from
    > > scratch.
    > > If memory
    > > is nothing more than stored information in the brain, there would be
    > > no way of recreating the memory once it's been erased. The only
    > > explanation is that we literally recall the past (often making
    > > mistakes in the process) enabling us to reconstruct the memory after
    > > the neural trace has been destroyed. Memory must be taken at face
    > > value-- as a recollection of the past-- rather than simply the
    > > retrieval of information from cerebral vaults. We may regard neural
    > > traces as pointers to memories rather than the memories themselves.
    > >
    > > --TD
    > >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > 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 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 2.1.5 : Fri 30 May 2003 - 18:24:17 GMT