Neo
02-03-2005, 11:47 AM
I'm at work reading this book (on my break of course) about recovered memory theory. I'm using it for some of the stuff I'm writing about how information is preserved. Anyway it shows how the brain isn't a mechanical recording device which captures everything flawlessly, it instead captures bits and pieces and then fills in the gaps in order to make sense of the experience. In order to make it into long-term memory storage experiences have to be recounted over and over which introduces even more inaccuracies. 10-30% of the population is highly suggestible and researchers have shown that false memories can be implanted into people and they can be totally convinced of the accuracy.
Also when the Challenger exploded in 1986 a bunch of students were asked where they were, what they were doing, etc. Three years later they asked them the same question and a third of them gave wildly inaccurate reports. When shown their original reports in their own hand writing they couldn't believe that they had written that. They were so sure their present memories were correct. Isn't that f#cked up? It makes you think about who you are or who you think you are. Some of what we believe about the past may not be true at all.
Also when the Challenger exploded in 1986 a bunch of students were asked where they were, what they were doing, etc. Three years later they asked them the same question and a third of them gave wildly inaccurate reports. When shown their original reports in their own hand writing they couldn't believe that they had written that. They were so sure their present memories were correct. Isn't that f#cked up? It makes you think about who you are or who you think you are. Some of what we believe about the past may not be true at all.