Re: ality

From: Dace (
Date: Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:34:03 GMT

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "Re: Why memeoids?"

    Received: by id BAA10852 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 1 Mar 2002 01:38:16 GMT
    Message-ID: <001b01c1c0c1$2dc9b720$8224f4d8@teddace>
    From: "Dace" <>
    To: <>
    References: <> <p04320419b8a334db757f@[]>
    Subject: Re: ality
    Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 17:34:03 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
    X-Priority: 3
    X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
    X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
    X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
    Precedence: bulk

    > >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.


    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 01 2002 - 01:48:14 GMT