6 ms·

I am still reading it, but already I see it unnecessarily engages in a postmodernist-like confusion of map and territory. > Yet you know sure as you were born

I am still reading it, but already I see it unnecessarily engages in a postmodernist-like confusion of map and territory. > Yet you know sure as you were born that there's a broader world outside ... [you know a bunch of other things about reality] ... At this instant, reading by yourself, where do these realities reside? Inside your mind. Memory in a very real sense is reality. Bloom is absolutely right that memory is central to all this. But it's a category error to say that just because your knowledge of reality is through memory, that memory is the only realitiy. Ok, it's logically possible there is no external reality, and all that exists is just my (Ratnapala's) memory. But even then the distinction remains. Then, the lying medium (memory) is real, but the content of those memories is not a reality.

sp332 10y ago
I don't think it's talking about external reality. It's talking about the past. Your memories are the real, even physical residue of your experience of the past. And the past doesn't exist anymore in any other form.
- orly_bookz 10y ago
  And then the fun part is that every time you remember a memory, you re-encode it and (probably) slightly alter it. When you vividly remember an event from a decade ago it most likely did not happen like you remember. They've done longitudinal studies on people's memories of things like JFK assassination and 9/11. People swear they remember it clear as day but it never really matches up to what they were actually doing... Memories are bunk, is my point. Only media can really record history.
  - collyw 10y ago
    And media can be manipulated. Its like 1984 when you think about it.
  - Nadya 10y ago
    >Memories are bunk, is my point. Only media can really record history. I don't trust media because Berenstein bears is the proper spelling [0]. I died when I was 6 years old after an asthma attack and shifted into another timeline where I survived. It shares most of the same details but likes to throw a few typos in to check if I'm paying attention. I'm not sure the purpose of these tests, but I'm sure I'll figure it out. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabulation#Mandela_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabulation#Mandela_effect /s While confabulation is a severe problem with human memory, I don't trust media because history is written by the winners.
visarga 10y ago
Even if there is no reality outside memory, there still is a simulation. We could not have created such a complex world buy pure imagination. The simulation might be just as complex as the reality itself. So, it would be just a game of words to distinguish between them.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- amatic 10y ago
  Why would there be a simulation? Do you call all perceptions simulations?
  - keithb- 10y ago
    I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps it was meant to say "stimulation" otherwise we're just talking about another layer of separation from reality. "To see things in a new light is a cognitive challenge; to adjust the language to the new insight is nothing more than a bothersome technicality." - Rudolph Arnheim, Visual Thinking
visarga 10y ago
Even if there is no reality outside memory, there still is a simulation.
metaphorm 10y ago
I don't think its correct to automatically assume naive solipsism of the author. these two statements are both true (as far as we can verify in this limited human existence, anyway): 1. there is a world beyond an individual's consciousness. 2. an individual can only ever experience the world through their own consciousness, and therefore their own senses and memories. Bloom's statement contradicts neither of those things. He is simply acknowledging that from an individual's own subjective point of view, their own consciousness is really the only thing they can work with in a direct sense. That isn't a denial or negation of exterior reality. For practical purposes though, if we wish to examine consciousness we are pretty much stuck in examining our own consciousness, since that's the only one we have direct access to.
- Retric 10y ago
  The human brain can be directly influenced by the outside world. Calling that either 'senses' or 'memories' is abusing the terms rather heavily. Alternatively, someone can eat LSD without sensing it. But, that LSD is still going to have a profound effect.
  - metaphorm 10y ago
    I don't understand your point, and it seems to me that you didn't understand mine. Of course the human mind (which is NOT identical with the brain, not a good idea to conflate those terms) is influenced by the outside world. Sense organs (and the sensations in consciousness that arise due to them) are the means through which external reality causes changes in consciousness. Why is it wrong to call that "senses"? How is that abusing the term? It's the literal meaning of the word.
    - Retric 10y ago
      Sight and balance is a sense, direct neural stimulation is something else. A stroke for example can do all sorts of nasty things without influencing memory or triggering anything you can detect.
      - 10y ago

sp332 10y ago

I don't think it's talking about external reality. It's talking about the past. Your memories are the real, even physical residue of your experience of the past. And the past doesn't exist anymore in any other form.

orly_bookz 10y ago
And then the fun part is that every time you remember a memory, you re-encode it and (probably) slightly alter it. When you vividly remember an event from a decade ago it most likely did not happen like you remember. They've done longitudinal studies on people's memories of things like JFK assassination and 9/11. People swear they remember it clear as day but it never really matches up to what they were actually doing... Memories are bunk, is my point. Only media can really record history.
- collyw 10y ago
  And media can be manipulated. Its like 1984 when you think about it.
- Nadya 10y ago
  >Memories are bunk, is my point. Only media can really record history. I don't trust media because Berenstein bears is the proper spelling [0]. I died when I was 6 years old after an asthma attack and shifted into another timeline where I survived. It shares most of the same details but likes to throw a few typos in to check if I'm paying attention. I'm not sure the purpose of these tests, but I'm sure I'll figure it out. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabulation#Mandela_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabulation#Mandela_effect /s While confabulation is a severe problem with human memory, I don't trust media because history is written by the winners.

visarga 10y ago

Even if there is no reality outside memory, there still is a simulation. We could not have created such a complex world buy pure imagination. The simulation might be just as complex as the reality itself. So, it would be just a game of words to distinguish between them.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
amatic 10y ago
Why would there be a simulation? Do you call all perceptions simulations?
- keithb- 10y ago
  I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps it was meant to say "stimulation" otherwise we're just talking about another layer of separation from reality. "To see things in a new light is a cognitive challenge; to adjust the language to the new insight is nothing more than a bothersome technicality." - Rudolph Arnheim, Visual Thinking

visarga 10y ago

Even if there is no reality outside memory, there still is a simulation.

metaphorm 10y ago

I don't think its correct to automatically assume naive solipsism of the author. these two statements are both true (as far as we can verify in this limited human existence, anyway): 1. there is a world beyond an individual's consciousness. 2. an individual can only ever experience the world through their own consciousness, and therefore their own senses and memories. Bloom's statement contradicts neither of those things. He is simply acknowledging that from an individual's own subjective point of view, their own consciousness is really the only thing they can work with in a direct sense. That isn't a denial or negation of exterior reality. For practical purposes though, if we wish to examine consciousness we are pretty much stuck in examining our own consciousness, since that's the only one we have direct access to.

Retric 10y ago
The human brain can be directly influenced by the outside world. Calling that either 'senses' or 'memories' is abusing the terms rather heavily. Alternatively, someone can eat LSD without sensing it. But, that LSD is still going to have a profound effect.
- metaphorm 10y ago
  I don't understand your point, and it seems to me that you didn't understand mine. Of course the human mind (which is NOT identical with the brain, not a good idea to conflate those terms) is influenced by the outside world. Sense organs (and the sensations in consciousness that arise due to them) are the means through which external reality causes changes in consciousness. Why is it wrong to call that "senses"? How is that abusing the term? It's the literal meaning of the word.
  - Retric 10y ago
    Sight and balance is a sense, direct neural stimulation is something else. A stroke for example can do all sorts of nasty things without influencing memory or triggering anything you can detect.
    - 10y ago