Letters to the Editor...
Article - The Deceptive Memory
“The Deceptive Memory” [The Deceptive Nature of Memory] When we look up at the sky, especially at night, the stars we see in the sky are in their past condition—the lights radiated by these objects need time to reach our eyes. The stars that we see at this very moment could be in their condition of one year ago, or perhaps even millions of years ago. In fact, it is also possible that among these numerous celestial bodies that we see as tangible objects, some may have either utterly changed, or moved else where, or completely diminished. Similarly, all those things around us need time to get to our eyes and further to our brain. An object a meter away from us needs 1/300,000,000 of a second to get to our eyes. Thus, we can say that this object that we see is in its condition of 1/300,000,000 of a second ago. Why are we able to see the “past” of the various celestial objects and also of our surroundings? Could it be that the word “past” has all this time been misinterpreted and misused? Is it true that Man always feels that he consistently exists “at the present” throughout his lifetime? Let’s say that at this very moment our arms are at rest, hanging down by our sides. Now, the instant we raise our arms, what could possibly be said of them would be that seconds ago they were hanging down by our sides. Why is it that in either situation, arms up or arms down, our feeling of existence seems to tell us that we are consistently at the “present”? The same thing holds true even for movements that require a longer time span, perhaps an hour or a day, or a year: You will always feel that your existence is consistently at the “present.” Since our childhood we have always felt that we “consistently exist” at the “present.” To say that childhood is a condition of “the past” would, therefore, seem to be contradictory to the existing “feeling of existence.” Actually, how long is the time span that we call now or the present? Is it one second, 0.1 second, 1/100,000,000 of a second, or close to 0 second? Considering the fact that no matter how short a time span is people can always split it into “the past” and “the present,” one can thus deduce that 0 second, being the point at which no more division could be made, would be the most accurate figure. In other words, at this point, terms such as “the past” and “the present,” as normally used by people, should no longer hold. When we throw a ball from points A to B, for instance, we tend to say that the ball was at point A. Does this not mean that at the time the ball was at point A, the rays reflected by the ball left an impression or are recorded in our brain, which we try to retrace at the present? We are all fully aware that in our childhood we had had a variety of experiences. The question now is, “Where have all these childhood experiences of ours, which had in fact been recorded as memories in our brains, gone?” Verily, a larger part of our childhood body condition has remained preserved, together with the childhood memories, in our adult bodies. Similarly, a larger part of our adult body condition has remained preserved in our aged bodies. Thus, at the time a person recalls all his childhood kite- flying experiences, for instance, he seems to feel the childhood period that he had once had and all the things he had once experienced. Now, if you still find it difficult to comprehend where your childhood body has gone then, let’s just take a balloon as an analogy. Let’s say, to inflate the balloon to a particular size you need five seconds. Now, inflate it for another ten seconds to make it bigger, and inflate it again for another twenty seconds to make it even bigger. The question now is where has the balloon at its smallest gone? Certainly, the answer is: The matters of the balloon, which was then at its smallest, are still inside the balloon, now at its biggest. Naturally, the word “seconds” used for the balloon has to be replaced with the word “years” when it comes to talking about the growth of man. What we are trying to imply by our experiment with the balloon above is that even with our bodies growing to such conditions as they are at the present, we are still preserving a larger part of those matters of our childhood bodies. The fact that after the morning comes the afternoon, and then comes the night, after which we have the morning again and so on, has eventually caused the sequential change of conditions to be strongly recorded as memories. This, makes it very easy for us to recall at any time the presence of the “sequenced conditions.” It is very natural if we insist that such things like “the future” or “tomorrow” do exist. As such, it could thus be said that all those plans for tomorrow are but just an imagination added to the outcome of the recollection of “the presence of tomorrow.” As long as we have the ability to condition our selves by recalling the traces of all the memories stored in our brains from the “previous condition,” we will consequently be led into thinking that “the past” do exist. The changing condition that we go through everyday, such as morning, afternoon, and night, having been recorded as memory, we thus assume that we will inevitably undergo similar changes every day. This reasonably explains why we have always believed that “the future” is there for us to undergo. Apparently we are “being deceived” by those “impressions of the previous conditions” that have remained imprinted as our memories. By Reinarto Hadipriono Copyright © 2002 Reinarto@Hadipriono.com www.deceptivememory.com
Reinarto Hadipriono, Reinarto@Hadipriono.com,
11/26/02
This month's letters:
Teaching in virginia, 11/26/02, by kavitha.
Article - The Deceptive Memory, 11/26/02, by Reinarto Hadipriono.
Decline of reading test scores..., 11/24/02, by Arthur E. Coords.
IS THERE COLLEGES FOR I.E.P. STUDENTS, 11/19/02, by kim.
IS THERE COLLEGES FOR I.E.P. STUDENTS, 11/19/02, by kim.
Reading Stats Continued, 11/15/02, by AP.
a new chatboard, 11/14/02, by sharon benitez.
response to AP, 11/13/02, by sonia.glogowski.
reading stats, 11/13/02, by sonia glogowski.
Reading stats comment, 11/10/02, by AP.
reading stats, 11/07/02, by sonia.
hi can you help me, 11/04/02, by Jacinta Theresita O.Bravo.
|