In the evidence section, footnote 53, Shenk gives us an excerpt from his previous book The Forgetting. Here he describes the case of a Russian reporter who could remember virtually every single detail in his life. He took his memory for granted and could easily memorize enormous lists of numbers within minutes and never forget them even after twenty years. However, the reporter was plagued by the inability to see meaning in what he memorized. He could not distinguish simple patterns unless they were pointed out to him. (236-239)
Do you believe that having a perfect memory is an evolutionary advantage? A flaw? Do you think that forgetfulness is actually helping you by allowing you to erase useless information? If given the choice, would you want to have such an ability? Why?
Vlad Miskevich (vladmiskevich@yahoo.com)
In Chapter 49 where it discusses the nervous system, Campbell mentions the re reason that some memories are long term while others are short term from an evolutionary perspective. The accepted viewpoint right now is “that the delay in forming connections in the cerebral cortex allows long term memories to be integrated… providing a basis for meaningful associations” (1079). This means over time our brains have evolved to retain useful information. Usefulness of information comes from long term experiences and repetition. It would make sense that survival came easier for species that could remember how to perform tasks and the location of essential resources, while also not wasting energy on non-significant experiences. Yet, perfect memory still remains in our gene pool.
ReplyDeleteShenk talks about a study carried out by Ericsson and Chase on the capabilities of human memory using random number patterns. One individual in the study, initials SF, was tested with normal intelligence and short term memory. This student was able to increase his short term memory from reciting in the seven to ten digit range to “a staggering eight-plus digits before the team concluded the experiment” two years later (54). But this test subject did not have perfect memory nor developed it. This was confirmed when a series of random letters were shown and his average dropped back. So what about people with already perfect memory? CBS News wrote an article about studies done with a handful of special individuals. The reason they were special was because they could remember their whole lives in detail. MRI scan revealed that two areas in the brain may make the difference. One of them is “the temporal lobe… the chunk of brain neurobiologists think has to do with storing new memories”. It would make sense that a larger temporal lobe in that case would boost memory capabilities. But what’s really interesting is that the second region is “called the "caudate nucleus," and was seven to eight times larger than normal. This section of the brain is responsible for “habit, or skill learning”, which as we know from Campbell means improved long term memory, and tends to larger in patients with obsessive compulsion disorder, OCD. Although not enough data has been collected to place a correlation between OCD and perfect memory, many of the individuals in the study have stated to posses OCD tendencies like repetition of simple tasks almost instinctively, like hand washing or object arrangement.
(http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-7156877.html)
So if there is correlation between perfect memory and OCD, is there an evolutionary advantage with OCD? The British psychologists who wrote an article about their hypothesis on the evolutionary advantages of OCD think so. These scientists have “hypothesised that obsessional phenomena function as an off-line risk avoidance process” [British spelling]. This means that OCD acts as, like the title of their article states, a psychological immune system. Much like how our immune system has skin, mucus, and antibodies to prevent disease before it occurs, OCD is suggested to generate risk situations and helps the individuals avoid them. Evolutionarily this means if risk situations are predicted and prevented then survival chances increase as do the chance to pass on genetic traits.
(http://cogprints.org/1147/1/ocd-final.htm)
The six perfect memory candidates claim that their gifts can be helpful and British scientists believe it’s advantageous. But Campbell suggesting that remembering useful experiences while forgetting non-useful ones makes more sense. If a lifetime worth of memories are stored, most of it is a waste of energy. Also OCD patients may be able to simulate risk scenarios, but since it’s involuntary, events will be repeated that have no benefits. This is also a waste of energy. Natural selection favors organisms and traits that are essential and waste minimum energy. So for that reason I would not want to have perfect memory.
Alvin Varghese (alvin.varghese@hotmail.com)
I agree with Alvin in his conclusion that having perfect memory is detrimental. Like he stated, that over time evolution has favored the retaining of useful information over useless information, supports that one of the primary roles of memory is in fact to serve as a sort of filter—identifying and storing away the important information while discarding the useless information. In fact, our memory consists of two main systems: the short term or “working” memory and the long term memory. The short term memory serves the purpose of temporarily holding information about things that are currently relevant (sometimes in vivid detail), which the long term memory holds massive amounts of cumulative information (a bit hazy) (http://w ww.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-do-we-forget-things). If we consider the vast amount of stimuli we are bombarded with daily, we would realize that to remember every smell, sight, or feeling of our day would certainly be counterproductive. While our brain is flooded with this useless information, it focuses less on the more important aspects, such as seeing the significance of certain events. This was demonstrated clearly in the experiment with the individual S., who would remember long charts full of numbers but not even recognize simple patterns within them (Shenk 238).
ReplyDeleteI thought Alvin’s comment about the correlation between perfect memory and OCD was really interesting; I had never once before thought there was any relation. However, as I read through the information presented by the British psychologists, I couldn’t help but disagree a little. They classified OCD as a “psychological immune system” that protects against potential risk situations, which immediately made me think of how sometimes the immune system is over-responsive, protecting the body even when there is no need. In extreme cases, sometimes the immune system can even turning on a person’s own body cells, as is the case in autoimmune disease (Campbell 949). Alvin talked about how OCD is potentially an evolutionary advantage because it prevents risky situations, but when considering the cost versus gain of OCD, it seems like the cost far overrides the gain. For example, if a particular person is obsessed with checking the stove ten times before leaving their house, it is true that they are potentially averting a house fire, but in the mean time they are acting obsessively and putting their body under a lot of mental tension and stress. Their reaction is unnecessary and even irrational.
If I were to be presented with the chance of having perfect memory, I would decline in a heartbeat. Sure, it would be a cool thing to “show off” at dinner parties to amuse the guests, but considering the huge disconnect between memorizing information and actually understanding the information, I would never agree to having perfect memory. Also, to remember every detail of every day would certainly prove to cause annoyance in the long run.
Diane Kuai (dianekuai@gmail.com)