RE: MD Individuality

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Nov 18 2002 - 15:56:01 GMT

  • Next message: Lawrence DeBivort: "MD Rise and fall of empires"

    Hi John:

    In answer to my question how memory survives changes in brain cells
    you wrote:
     
    > A memory is a process involving the activation of a
    > distinct (though constantly changing) neural firing
    > pattern within a distributed system. It is contained
    > within the physical linkages between the relevant
    > cells. Each time the memory is recalled it reinforces
    > the bond between them, but, of course, memories can be
    > forgotten! If you knew what you were looking for you
    > could, with a sensitive enough mocroscope, discern the
    > shape of a memory, woven like a cobweb in the dense
    > tissue of the cortex. As long as the memory remains
    > that 'web' will remain.
    > (Adapted from Rita Carter - Conciousness - Weidenfeld
    > & Nicolson - 2002 pg 153)
    >
    > I don't understand what your distinction between means
    > and meaning has to do with philosophical dualism so
    > can't answer the question. That being said, you can't
    > have two philosophical dualisms at the same time, for
    > the result would be a quadism!

    Well, that memory "pattern" or "web" you speak of is a fine example of
    "meaning" since it's that pattern (according to your source) that
    contains the meaningful memory. The "means" in your description are
    the "linkages" and the "cells." (Still not explained is how the linkages
    are maintained as cells are replaced over time.)

    To clarify, meanings are products of mind. Science says it's only
    concerned with means, i.e. mechanism, matter, etc. (Not true, of
    course.) That's the relationship to the mind-matter dualism you asked
    about.

    It's interesting to me that the patterns of memory or "webs" in your
    description could be discerned if only one had a sensitive enough
    microscope. I take it that such a microscope has yet to be invented
    although I believe there are instruments for making atomic patterns
    visible which casts doubt on the "sensitive enough" statement. So I take
    it that what you describe is educated conjecture yet to be confirmed by
    reproducible observation. Is that correct?
      
    Platt

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 18 2002 - 15:56:17 GMT