| Apr 2003 | |
| ISBN 0262024969 | |
| 1206 pp. | |
| 243 illus. | |
| Essential Sources in the Scientific Study of Consciousness |
|
Bernard J. Baars William P. Banks James B. Newman
|
tagged cognitive framing memory by ncrimes ...on 18-SEP-08
tour titled South Asian on City of Memory
City of Memory
City of Memory is brought to you by City Lore; a not-for-profit organization, founded in 1986 which produces programs and publications that convey the richness of New York City\'s cultural heritage. To find out more information about City Lore and our projects go to citylore.org
Woudenberg, René van. “Thomas Reid on Memory.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 37.1 (1999): 117-133.
This paper by René van Woudenberg discusses Thomas Reid’s view on memory. The paper offers a philosophical perspective on the nature of the human intellect and the faculty of memory. Reid provides a distinction between memory and perception, saying that memory is a “knowledge of things past,” whereas perception is a “knowledge of things present.” Therefore, the things we remember are separate and inapplicable to the things we perceive. Questions arise as to the way in which we remember things in the past and the possibility of remembering things in the future, such as an appointment the following week. Reid argues that a memory of the latter kind is merely a remembrance of the specific moment in which we learned the knowledge. Memory, therefore, is an “avenue of knowledge.” Reid’s ideas are met with many critics, specifically mentioned here is William Hamilton. Another interesting discussion is Reid’s correlation between memory and belief. Reid states that the presence of memory means that there is also belief. Where there is no belief, there can be no memory. This viewpoint leaves little room for the intentional reconstruction of memory. Next he brings up the intriguing notion of the perception of memory. B can check A’s memory, for example, but only with the predisposition belief in his own. This circularity of reliability he terms epistemic circularity. The question arises then on where does realism exist?
This article is extremely illuminating in the discussion of Kurosawa’s film Rashomon. Since the main argument of the film is the concept of human perceptions and altered reality, the audience questions not only the story as seen from each character but also the story itself. Can we ever be sure of what we are seeing and know for a fact what actually happened? We can only see what is shown to us through different character’s perspectives and then intermixed with our own. Even the witness, therefore, is an unreliable source to ascertain the truth of the crime. Reid’s article made me completely rethink whether I can trust what I see on the screen or how I react to it. Does a story exist if only our memory holds it?
Joyce, Richard. “Cartesian Memory.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 35.3 (1997): 375-393.
This paper, from a journal discussing the history of philosophy, examines Descartes’ theories on memory. Descartes places memory into two forms: the corporeal and the intellectual. In the discussion about corporeal memory, Descartes provides a scientific description of sensory functions, including the stimulation of nerve fibers and the reception by brain particles. Images transferred into our brain can originate from a physical stimuli or an imagined one. Intellectual memory, on the other hand, is independent of our body and unable to be logically illustrated on paper or in discourse. This title of the article, “Cartesian Memory,” comes into play here in the circularity of Descartes arguments on memory. He writes that all we can trust as true is what we perceive, yet states that such a perception if impossible without the guarantee of clarity and mental distinction. Perception negates truth in this argument. He cannot claim that his reasoning is true and right when memory cannot be trusted; hence the labeling of his discourses on memory as Cartesian, referring to the famous circular argument of his exposed in the now labeled “Cartesian Circle.”
This paper offers another interesting insight into the nature of memory. Descartes does bring up the interesting aspect of the biological nature of memory and perception, despite the overall fallibility of his claims. His misperception just further proves the power of viewpoints and self-assertion. This paper fits nicely with the Thomas Reid paper on memory also included in this project. Descartes belief in his correctness does not denote the actual accuracy of his statements. Again, the notion of individual fact versus actual fact can be applied to Kurosawa’s Rashomon. One can argue that perhaps the characters are not intentionally lying for self-affirmation but rather from an intrinsic error in their memory and reality. The concept of truth is again brought into question here.
-from ScienceDirect
Continued as Journal of Memory and Language
Holdings: 1962-1984
tagged Christopher_Nolan John_Orr Memento culture film information_age memory montage technology truth by mpopova ...on 06-APR-06
tagged Chaucer Christopher_Nolan Memento Ruth_Evans Troilus film history identity memory by mpopova ...on 06-APR-06



