Re: ality

From: Joe Dees (
Date: Wed Feb 06 2002 - 06:36:54 GMT

  • Next message: Jeremy Bradley: "Re: Memetic as an Adjective"

    Received: by id GAA19094 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 6 Feb 2002 06:42:37 GMT
    Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 22:36:54 -0800
    Message-Id: <>
    Content-Type: text/plain
    Content-Disposition: inline
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
    X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.104 (Entity 4.116)
    X-Originating-Ip: []
    From: "Joe Dees" <>
    Subject: Re: ality
    Precedence: bulk

    ('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is)

    > "Dace" <> <> Re: alityDate: Tue, 5 Feb 2002 13:43:48 -0800
    >> >> >> >Joe Dees:
    >> >> >> >
    >> >> >> >
    >> >> >> OF COURSE memories are stored in the brain, but cortical
    >> >> >neurons are plastic, and can easily relearn that which was excised
    >> >> >>>>
    >> >> >
    >> >> >How are neurons supposed to encode recently destroyed memories
    >> >> >when these memories no longer exist? Clearly, this is not an option.
    >> >> >
    >> >> You said that they were able to *relearn* them easily, so obviously, it
    >> >
    >> >Scuse me? Here's what I said:
    >> >
    >> >"The attempt to scientifically demonstrate the existence of memory traces
    >> >or 'engrams' in the brain goes all the way back to the 20s, when Karl
    >> >Lashley experimented on conditioned learning in rats, monkeys, and
    >> >chimpanzees. He would train them to remember the correct reaction to a
    >> >given stimulus and then remove the portion of the brain utilized in the
    >> >conditioned response. The animals would quickly regain their former
    >> >memories, despite the permanent loss of brain tissue."
    >> >
    >> >The word "relearn" appeared only in your response, as quoted above.
    >> >
    >> In this case, to regain a response is indistinguishable from relearning
    >If memories aren't encoded in the brain, then it's not necessary to relearn
    >anything. The mind simply relies on different neurons to facilitate the
    >recollection. If memories are indeed encoded in the brain, then once the
    >relevant neural tissue is destroyed, they're not going to suddenly pop up in
    >a different set of neurons.
    You are confusing a behavioral response with a memory. Flatworms have been presented with a light, immediately followed by an electric current running through the bottom of their cages; they learned to jump when the light flashed. Their bodies were ground up and fed to other flatworms who had been spared the experience. When the light flashed, this group of flatworms jumped, too. Lacking brains, they could not be said to 'remember' anything, not could it be said that flatworm cannibalism communicated mempories. What it communicated was a chemically based propinquity for muscles to contract in the presence of a light stimulus.
    Memories, OTOH, are stored in certain areas of the brain, but in a holistic fashion (that's what is meant by neural NETWORKS). When part of the network is destroyed, the rest contributes what it retains, and its electrochemical interactions with remaining neurons, axons, dendrites and synapses may re-form the original configuration. if the entire area is excised, this will not occur; of the occipital lobes are entirely excised, no visual memory will henceforth occur.
    >> >> If you are saying that once the appropriate identified location was
    >> >*completely* excised, that the memory or action was supposedly able to
    >> >occur in its entirety the FIRST time as well as it did before the
    >excision, I
    >> >want URL or book references, with pagination, so's I can sell an article
    >> >refuting such ludicrous nonsense.
    >> >>>>
    >> >
    >> >You might benefit from an introductory textbook on the brain. Lashley's
    >> >article, "In search of the engram," appeared in the Symposium of the
    >> >for Experimental Biology, 4:454-483. His student, Karl Pribram, pursued
    >> >possibility of holistically-stored memories in Languages of the Brain,
    >> >
    >> In my master's seminar in Biological Psychology we used the classic text
    >of the same name by James W. Kalat. I highly recommend it for CONTEPORARY,
    >rather than historical, cog-sci info.
    >Why don't you look up memory in it, and see what it says?
    What do you think I've been trying to teach you?
    >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)

    Looking for a book? Want a deal? No problem AddALL! compares book price at 41 online stores.

    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 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 11:15:35 GMT