The man with 30 second memory

[LeoM]

i wonder how this case could be explained by the transmission theory of the mind and brain YouTube - The Man with a 30 Second Memory

[Interesting Ian]

Originally Posted by LeoM

i wonder how this case could be explained by the transmission theory of the mind and brain YouTube - The Man with a 30 Second Memory

Well we don't need extreme cases like that to realise that the brain affects memory. It is not as if we can remember everything we have ever done.

My hypothesis is that we have memories of everything we have ever experienced but the structure of the brain prohibits access to them. Indeed most memories appear to be irretrievably lost eg what I was doing on a particular day when I was 7 years old.

But if the brain merely "filters" out memories then it seems to me that no memories would ever be irretrievably lost, and when the self becomes detached from the brain we will have access to all our memories i.e everything that has ever happened to us.

Now I believe that long forgotten memories can be elicited by poking about the brain in an appropriate way. So that would be compatible with transmission theory. Is it also compatible with production theory? (i.e the brain produces consciousness). I suppose that prima facie if you subscribe to the production theory then you wouldn't expect the brain to store (and maybe it's not even capable of storing) every single memory of everything that has ever happened to us. But there again, maybe the brain doesn't. Maybe poking around in the brain can only retrieve certain lost memories and not others.

More importantly if the brain merely filters out memories then you would expect people who undergo deep NDEs to have access to everything that has ever happened to them. Now I do believe that happens, at least sometimes. So that suppoerts transmission theory over production theory. But is it not the case that even during deep NDEs many people do not have access to all memories? And what about just normal OBEs? I can't recall people who undergo OBEs claim they can remember everything that has ever happened to them whilst during that state. On the other hand maybe we need to distinguish between something like voluntary induced OBEs and the OBEs experienced very close to death (or just after death).

Anyway I don't believe the fact that someone has a 30 second memory rules out the transmission theory. In order to maintain that you would need to argue that if the brain doesn't create the self, then the brain cannot possibly affect any properties of the self such as memories, personality etc.

[LeoM]

I am with you on the transmission theory thanks for answering my question I have also look at the evidence for life after death and psi and i am also impressed by it.

[LeoM]

I agree with you at first i thought the case was compelling enough to show that the production theory was correct over the transmission but then i started to think more about it and realize it doesn't.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Ian

But if the brain merely "filters" out memories then it seems to me that no memories would ever be irretrievably lost, and when the self becomes detached from the brain we will have access to all our memories i.e everything that has ever happened to us.

You have absolutely no theory whatsoever about how my memories are stored externally, so how can you possibly be confident about these two conclusions? Perhaps the reason my brain can't dredge up a memory is because it isn't stored anywhere at all.

How does the transmission theory explain subconscious data acquisition? Is the data collected by nonconscious brain processes, transmitted to the external memory, and then retransmitted to my conscious brain?

~~ Paul

[Interesting Ian]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

You have absolutely no theory whatsoever about how my memories are stored externally, so how can you possibly be confident about these two conclusions? Perhaps the reason my brain can't dredge up a memory is because it isn't stored anywhere at all.

I certainly don't think memory is stored anywhere. You're talking as if our memories are comparable to a computer's memory. But I don't see memories as being like this at all. I just consider memory to be a particular conscious experience, and they are no more stored than any other conscious experience. Conscious experiences are simply an intrinsic property of the self.

How does the transmission theory explain subconscious data acquisition? Is the data collected by nonconscious brain processes, transmitted to the external memory, and then retransmitted to my conscious brain?

Why would it differ from production theory?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Ian

I certainly don't think memory is stored anywhere. You're talking as if our memories are comparable to a computer's memory. But I don't see memories as being like this at all. I just consider memory to be a particular conscious experience, and they are no more stored than any other conscious experience. Conscious experiences are simply an intrinsic property of the self.

If I can recall them later, then they are stored somewhere. You don't get to dismiss the problem of memory storage by calling it an "intrinsic property."

Why would it differ from production theory?

What's production theory?

~~ Paul

[Open Mind]

I agree with Ian's comments ..... but would like to add my own personal viewpoint upon these ......

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

If I can recall them later, then they are stored somewhere. You don't get to dismiss the problem of memory storage by calling it an "intrinsic property."

It doesn't mean these are located physically in the brain. Memories could be stored in another dimension i.e. only our 3 dimensions are simply more measurable when functioning through the filter/interface/measuring device called the brain.

Similarly one could view memories as points of time, consciousness could be an individualized, personalized, filtered perspective of past time .... it doesn't mean the past has evaporated from existence, just that time and consciousness has moved on to something new.

Time, as consciously experienced through matter of the brain, is an oddity, in that it seems half a dimension. In a single mono-dimension one can move both direction, to and fro .... but not in time .... we seem stuck moving in one direction, perhaps our brain is just filtering access to the past direction and we perceive it as memory?

Can it be tested? Yes ...... this is one of the reasons why Rupert Sheldrake's 'formative causation' - a 'presence of the past' needs to be tested properly. It is memory system, not stored locally, theoretically affecting generations of people at an 'unconscious' level that bubbles up into the conscious individualized mind and is not passed via genes or other normal physical sense communication.

I would go further than Sheldrake and claim the evolution of filtering of past memory, by the brain causes a new individual consciousness to emerge from a prior one. We simply cannot recall experiences before brain birth. Upon death, we can perhaps meet our former self but we are no longer that person, we just share the same source memories of the past .. we share a more collective (unconscious) group mind at a deeper level which still influences us but we retain a sense of individuality upon brain death as we have memories that relate directly to ourselves.

Can this be tested too Yes, it is already suggested in ....
- Memories of the past before brain birth in young children (the work of Dr Ian Stevenson and others), this would suggest the brain closes down access to past memory and is filtering, evolving the birth of a new consciousness that emerges free from the past at a conscious level but not completely free of the past at unconscious level.
- I would predict, psi is stronger in young children (I quoted you a controlled trial suggestive of this in other topic)

Despite a century, of die-hard skeptics claiming there is no way to link the common paranormal reports in to a single theory .... there are ..... the physicalist paradigm can be theoretically turn upon its head..... and further research may do so... the signs are already there

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

It doesn't mean these are located physically in the brain. Memories could be stored in another dimension i.e. only our 3 dimensions are simply more measurable when functioning through the filter/interface/measuring device called the brain.

Yes, they could be stored somewhere else, but they are still stored somewhere. Ian said "I just consider memory to be a particular conscious experience, and they are no more stored than any other conscious experience."

Similarly one could view memories as points of time, consciousness could be an individualized, personalized, filtered perspective of past time .... it doesn't mean the past has evaporated from existence, just that time and consciousness has moved on to something new.

I think it would be hard to argue that a memory is a filtered glance at a static point in (past) time. There is just too much difference between my memory of a past event and the actual event.

Can it be tested? Yes ...... this is one of the reasons why Rupert Sheldrake's 'formative causation' - a 'presence of the past' needs to be tested properly. It is memory system, not stored locally, theoretically affecting generations of people at an 'unconscious' level that bubbles up into the conscious individualized mind and is not passed via genes or other hysical sense means of communication.

By all means, test away.

~~ Paul

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Yes, they could be stored somewhere else, but they are still stored somewhere. Ian said "I just consider memory to be a particular conscious experience, and they are no more stored than any other conscious experience."

Well, Ian said 'I certainly don't think memory is stored anywhere' I took it to mean not localized anywhere in our 3 dimensional space ....outside space, or at least outside normally perceived space.

I think it would be hard to argue that a memory is a filtered glance at a static point in (past) time. There is just too much difference between my memory of a past event and the actual event.

Paul, perhaps human memories are modified by creatively recalling them, after which we can recall memories of memories and we blur the ability to tell the original memory from later memories about those events. I doubt the original memories (wherever these are stored) are damaged just we blur these with later memories which share some sort of resonance due to similarity.

Whilst computer programmers may feel perfect recall in computer memory is superior and nature has something inferior ...... arguably filtered memory, imperfect memory, allows greater lateral thinking to similar ideas or memories, filling in gaps creatively, etc... all useful for survival.

By all means, test away.

Actually I have been thinking hard about ways to do so ..... I'd like to do it on the internet in some way .... but the last thing I want to create is another mind numbingly dull zener card like test .....something creative yet strictly controlled

Cheers Paul