In this week’s reading, Bartlett discusses the complex process of creating and accessing a memory. As opposed to Ebbinghaus who explains memory as a collection of static articulated details, or “traces” in the brain, Bartlett’s “schema” is an active living thing that operates as a unitary mass. Citing experiments that much more closely resemble real life applications of memory, Bartlett contends that phenomena such as condensation, elaboration, and invention are actually quite common features of ordinary remembering.
While these characteristics may seem undesirable, they are a product of the constantly changing nature of the schema. Memories are not complete little moments that can be picked out and accessed as accurate reproductions. On the contrary, memories are constantly changing and being accessed in different way. Depending on personal attitude, the context of the remembering, and personal interest, different aspects of a memory will come to mind. Along that same line, attitude or personal character is tied up with memory. From the moment we are born our experiences shape our character and therefore dictate how we interact with the world. But exactly how much is our identity shaped by our memory? Does amnesia wipe out a part of your personality along with your memory? Can we experience self-awareness or experience emotions without creating new memories?
In the Searching for Memory chapters, Schacter describes instances in which the plasticity of memory can betray us. Though he makes a point of saying that only rarely do inaccurate memories result in tragedy, the examples he gives are truly frightening. While the stories of innocent people being wrongly imprisoned were horrible, I felt that not enough attention was paid to the other victim: the witness. Especially in the cases of false accusations of child molestation, is the child not even more of a victim than the adult? Though the children in these cases were presumably not molested, they were made to believe that they had been. Is an inaccurate memory of being sexually molested any less damaging than one based on actual events? And is it ethical to test the subjectivity of a child’s mind by planting a memory of having to go the hospital with a badly injured hand?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I find your comment about the connection of personality and memory to be very intriguing. The idea of having amnesia, and therefore losing your personality is something that i have thought of before when presented with the idea of immortality. In this case, the idea was that immortality is in fact impossible because even if you lived for 500 years, you would prob only remember the last 50-60 years with any accuracy. Or in other words you would be an entirely different person every 100 years or so that had no memory of who you used to be, what you used to like, what your old values and beliefs are. However, in the the reading for last week there was an example of the woman who could not remember things, but somehow *remembered* being poked with a pin. In this case though she had forgotten the event, and the handshake, but she was able to make some kind of connection without a conscious memory. Of course the problem here is how long would she remember the pin prick, and does that kind of physical memory impart significant personality traits? Another question is, is having amnesia losing the ability to recall the memory at will, or by prompt, or does it mean you lose everything that was connected to that memory. For instance, if you completely forget a lover you had, would you still be perked by warm feelings when you smell something that reminds you of them, or hear a song that you had previously significantly associated with them? Either way, the idea of becoming a whole new person, or reverting back to someone you used to be [because you lost 10yrs of memory] is very interesting to me and i would love to talk in class about it.
Post a Comment