Re: New Scientist on memory

From: Dace (
Date: Mon 02 Jun 2003 - 00:36:59 GMT

  • Next message: Keith Henson: "Re: _Religion Explained_ by Pascal Boyer"

    > From:
    > >
    > > The brain does not contain records of memories but mere "traces" that
    > > point us to them. A trace can be wiped clean at the moment we
    > > remember it because, now that we recall it, we don't need the trace
    > > anymore. But we'll need it the next time we want to recall it. So
    > > the trace is re-fixed. But if the fix isn't carried out, there's
    > > nothing left, no "dynamized" or "fluidified" or "unmoored" relic.
    > > Simply nothing.
    > >
    > No, a memory that has been accessed is still in the brain, it is just in
    > realm of attention rather than being stored. If it is not chemically
    > blocked from doing so, the very act of reaccessing it causes the axons,
    > dendrites and synapses, through the electrical-stimulation-induced
    > production of the MAP-2 protein, to strengthen their myelin sheaths,
    > increasing the fixation of the memory pattern and therefor reinforcing
    > the memory.

    Rather than answer my point directly, you seem to be rehearsing your neurology jargon.

    > > > Lawrence:
    > > >
    > > > Dace, '"reconstituted" from scratch' sounds like an unmitigated
    > > > contradiction in terms to me. Can you explain how it isn't?
    > >
    > > Ted:
    > > It is a contradiction, Lawry. You can't reconstitute something from
    > > nothing, and there's nothing in the brain that could provide the model
    > > for reconstituting a memory trace once the memory is recalled.
    > > Therefore reconstitution of the memory trace proceeds through active
    > > recollection of the past. Without true memory, a trace would indeed
    > > have to be reconstituted from scratch-- an impossibility.
    > >
    > Joe:
    > Once again, Dace attempts to sneak his pet Sheldrakean 'morphic
    > resonance' magickal mystical Einsteinian-spacetime-denying woo-woo
    > in through yet another back door he mistakenly thinks he has
    > discovered. But doors leading the serious and ungullible to such
    > pseudoscientific and nonsensical absurdities just ain't there.

    Once again you reveal your tendency, when you can't refute a point, to go for the jugular.


    =============================================================== 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:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon 02 Jun 2003 - 00:40:34 GMT