How strange memory is.
A short story...
Two days ago i was playing golf with 3 friends. We had just finished putting and were recording each others scores for that hole. We also record the number of putts and one friend couldn't remember how many putts he made just minutes before. A discussion revealed that none of us could remember even though we had all watched him putting.
Some discussing of ball placing and comments made and the memory came flooding back to me. i could clearly picture the ball and the sequence that led up to it falling into the hole.
Obviously the memory was there but access to it was the problem. That could be a function of how the memory was stored. (short term/long term etc)
i have come to realise that anything i remember is fallible as to it's accuracy.
My wife and i often remember events differently.
Every situation is experienced through the personal 'lens' of each individual.
Where i pictured the balls position in the story above someone else may primarily remember the conversation had at the time and someone else may remember their movement around the green.
Add to this the emotion of elation or disappointment (or whatever) at the success or failure of the putt.
The degree of attention paid to a situation no doubt plays an important role on how well an event is remembered.
Memory being a function of the mind/brain is conditioned and so will probably continue to function after Enlightenment much the same as it always did only there won't be added anxiety about whether it is the onset of Alzheimer's or the self beratement that often accompanies forgetfulness.
See a comment from an Enlightened One on a post about Alzheimer's.
Memory of course, is mostly what our personal story is composed of. The history component of our identity is all memory. When we say "I like..." or "I don't like..." it is usually memory based. When we think "I am a person who..." it is memory based. Even our intentions for the future are memory based.
i remember when,
i forgot how to be me.
Was i someone else?
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Truth
This is a copy and paste of my post from a discussion on the Wisdom Page web site.
Socrates taught us not accept our existing thoughts as true. Step back and reevaluate the truth and veracity of your opinions and beliefs. Seek to know your real self and seek truth.
With this in mind...
Truth
What is truth?
If I accept the premise that truth exists as something separate, definable and see-able then I have to do something (focus) to experience it. (or stop doing something that stops me seeing it – i.e. having beliefs)
If, as I believed before, (I don’t know what I believe now) that truth is purely subjective, that everybody’s truth was true but peculiar to them, then there couldn’t/wouldn’t be an objective “external” truth. (hmmm, maybe they could both exist…)
What made it uniquely and peculiarly their truth was their history of experiences which by bringing to bear on the current situation, caused the perceptual distortions. I further reasoned (held the belief) that when the distortions were removed then nothing would remain, ergo that non existence was truth, or alternatively, that our historically affected perception made something out of nothing, made truth into false (the noun) and perceived it as form – thus creating a continuation of the world (“reality”)
Trouble is that as good as this sounds, it’s all bullshit!
It’s just another historically (or should I say hysterically?) affected distortion (or should I say perversion?) it’s just mind crap – making me feel better/good because I can believe that i know something that most people don’t know.
How can all of this mental bullshit lead to a clear, undistorted perception of the nothing that is truth (I still prefer my idea of reality – well not prefer (I don’t think…) I just can’t see (that is, think) how if ‘all is one’, how that there can be anything that is not the product of perception.
But this is still mental dribble, verbal diarrhoea and can only be of any use like the signpost or paved road as a travel tool.
I still maintain that the only reality is what we FEEL.
The way we feel is what we base our sense of well being on, our self esteem is directly related to how we feel…
Is what I feel real? Truth?
Is reacting to “what is” only being aware of actual happening, ie the sensation that tells me that I need to blow my nose, or the sound/feeling of gas gurgling in my guts or the image that is constructed in my brain - the stimulation of each of my senses? These my mind sense tells me are all coloured by history &/or my desires, so are not to be trusted.
Do I trust my mind that tells me that they are not to be trusted? This also, is monomaniacally focused on bringing me desires that will make me “feel good”
IT’S ALL FALSE, even the idea that it’s all false is false.
What is left?
Can I go through life with the false belief that it’s all false (this doesn’t make anything true!!) not believing even my sense inputs? My mind?
Well, yes.
This sounds like I will not make any decisions, just do what is in front of me, be purely reactive. Hmmm, that doesn’t sound like how it “should be” Why? – because (like everything else I believe) it’s something I picked up somewhere in the past.
An animal would be (?) purely reactive – reacting to external or internal stimuli.
A significant difference between humans and animals is the humans ability to appreciate ‘choice’.
If we are ‘animal like’ we can choose not to choose. That is, we can weigh up what is being offered and choose the one that doesn’t involve ego …
Reactive or Responsive ? Outcome focused. Which one is that ? I like the idea of catching the ‘winds of change’ as they blow by to tell me what to do. Not making ‘conscious’ decisions about how to “act” (how to be?)
Be lief, believe… be lief (lief is an adverb meaning willingly i.e. readily without reluctance) so belief is - be willingly !! Maybe SEE willingly is more “reality” (or truth) based.
OK, so I can’t see TRUTH, but I can see false.
How do I negate or strip away or make transparent the FALSE?
Just see it!
Recognise it for what it is. The False will evaporate in the face of scrutiny. (or so I believe) BUT, if I can’t believe what I believe (because [as I believe] all beliefs are False, how can I operate in the world?
I can only operate in the world by navigating my way around using beliefs…. How can I negate false when everything I see, hear, touch, smell, taste, and think is FALSE?
If I accept that everything is FALSE, then I also have to accept that I (my perception of ME) am FALSE. Hey that’s a no brainer. That I is obviously my ego. (but that is my mind telling me that – and it is also unbelievable. i.e FALSE) HELP!! There is nowhere to go….
Wait a minute! My bum just told me that it needed emptying. Is that FALSE? Partly. I guess it really just told me that it’s load COULD be reduced. To think that I HAD to go was false. To think that if I didn’t go then the sensation would increase to a Pain, was false. OK, maybe this is IT, my mind didn’t need to get involved at all in this, but my automatic response IS my mind interfering – based on beliefs.
I know (believe in an intellectual way) that I know nothing. That i have no absolute knowledge
Ok, I believe that nothing can be known with certainty. ( to know = see truth ?)(truth = objective fact ?)(fact = what actually IS ?)
I don't think (believe) that it matters. (I certainly can't know if it matters)
My experience = my interpretation of my sense input ? or my beliefs about my interpretations of my reactions ?
How is my experience and my mind separate ?
Isn't my physical/emotional experience greatly influenced by my memory of my previous experience?
Isn't most of my experience largely the result of my expectations ?
I don't think that I can give any more credibility to my experience as being related to truth than I can my beliefs.
Ok, I believe that nothing can be known with certainty. ( to know = see truth ?)(truth = objective fact ?)(fact = what actually IS ?)
I don't think (believe) that it matters. (I certainly can't know if it matters)
If truth is an ongoing interaction with the present (relating to “what is”) then truth is always new (it still could be the same truth)
Maybe “what is truth” should be “what is true”
Seeing what is “out there” that is an objective thing – truth is quite different to seeing what is inherently true in things!!
Seeing what is true in things is a way of seeing and seeing (here) is a metaphor for knowing.
This knowing transcends the thing. It becomes Experiencing the thing. (and so experience the dissolution of a boundary between the thing and you) and further investigation of the boundary between you and your name (ego – identity) the dissolution of which leaves you only as past thought patterns floating as memories on the ethers of now.
I have a feeling that truth is there to be ‘known’ by looking with the right kind of eyes. I think it isn’t something separate or different but a way of seeing ‘what is’ without the coloration of opinion – not that I can disappear opinion, but that I can see what coloration it causes (in myself)
If 1 plus 1 equals 2 then you would consider that to be a fact.
If I believe that 1 plus 1 equals 3 and I state my belief as fact, then, am I telling the truth?, My truth.
Socrates taught us not accept our existing thoughts as true. Step back and reevaluate the truth and veracity of your opinions and beliefs. Seek to know your real self and seek truth.
With this in mind...
Truth
What is truth?
If I accept the premise that truth exists as something separate, definable and see-able then I have to do something (focus) to experience it. (or stop doing something that stops me seeing it – i.e. having beliefs)
If, as I believed before, (I don’t know what I believe now) that truth is purely subjective, that everybody’s truth was true but peculiar to them, then there couldn’t/wouldn’t be an objective “external” truth. (hmmm, maybe they could both exist…)
What made it uniquely and peculiarly their truth was their history of experiences which by bringing to bear on the current situation, caused the perceptual distortions. I further reasoned (held the belief) that when the distortions were removed then nothing would remain, ergo that non existence was truth, or alternatively, that our historically affected perception made something out of nothing, made truth into false (the noun) and perceived it as form – thus creating a continuation of the world (“reality”)
Trouble is that as good as this sounds, it’s all bullshit!
It’s just another historically (or should I say hysterically?) affected distortion (or should I say perversion?) it’s just mind crap – making me feel better/good because I can believe that i know something that most people don’t know.
How can all of this mental bullshit lead to a clear, undistorted perception of the nothing that is truth (I still prefer my idea of reality – well not prefer (I don’t think…) I just can’t see (that is, think) how if ‘all is one’, how that there can be anything that is not the product of perception.
But this is still mental dribble, verbal diarrhoea and can only be of any use like the signpost or paved road as a travel tool.
I still maintain that the only reality is what we FEEL.
The way we feel is what we base our sense of well being on, our self esteem is directly related to how we feel…
Is what I feel real? Truth?
Is reacting to “what is” only being aware of actual happening, ie the sensation that tells me that I need to blow my nose, or the sound/feeling of gas gurgling in my guts or the image that is constructed in my brain - the stimulation of each of my senses? These my mind sense tells me are all coloured by history &/or my desires, so are not to be trusted.
Do I trust my mind that tells me that they are not to be trusted? This also, is monomaniacally focused on bringing me desires that will make me “feel good”
IT’S ALL FALSE, even the idea that it’s all false is false.
What is left?
Can I go through life with the false belief that it’s all false (this doesn’t make anything true!!) not believing even my sense inputs? My mind?
Well, yes.
This sounds like I will not make any decisions, just do what is in front of me, be purely reactive. Hmmm, that doesn’t sound like how it “should be” Why? – because (like everything else I believe) it’s something I picked up somewhere in the past.
An animal would be (?) purely reactive – reacting to external or internal stimuli.
A significant difference between humans and animals is the humans ability to appreciate ‘choice’.
If we are ‘animal like’ we can choose not to choose. That is, we can weigh up what is being offered and choose the one that doesn’t involve ego …
Reactive or Responsive ? Outcome focused. Which one is that ? I like the idea of catching the ‘winds of change’ as they blow by to tell me what to do. Not making ‘conscious’ decisions about how to “act” (how to be?)
Be lief, believe… be lief (lief is an adverb meaning willingly i.e. readily without reluctance) so belief is - be willingly !! Maybe SEE willingly is more “reality” (or truth) based.
OK, so I can’t see TRUTH, but I can see false.
How do I negate or strip away or make transparent the FALSE?
Just see it!
Recognise it for what it is. The False will evaporate in the face of scrutiny. (or so I believe) BUT, if I can’t believe what I believe (because [as I believe] all beliefs are False, how can I operate in the world?
I can only operate in the world by navigating my way around using beliefs…. How can I negate false when everything I see, hear, touch, smell, taste, and think is FALSE?
If I accept that everything is FALSE, then I also have to accept that I (my perception of ME) am FALSE. Hey that’s a no brainer. That I is obviously my ego. (but that is my mind telling me that – and it is also unbelievable. i.e FALSE) HELP!! There is nowhere to go….
Wait a minute! My bum just told me that it needed emptying. Is that FALSE? Partly. I guess it really just told me that it’s load COULD be reduced. To think that I HAD to go was false. To think that if I didn’t go then the sensation would increase to a Pain, was false. OK, maybe this is IT, my mind didn’t need to get involved at all in this, but my automatic response IS my mind interfering – based on beliefs.
I know (believe in an intellectual way) that I know nothing. That i have no absolute knowledge
Ok, I believe that nothing can be known with certainty. ( to know = see truth ?)(truth = objective fact ?)(fact = what actually IS ?)
I don't think (believe) that it matters. (I certainly can't know if it matters)
My experience = my interpretation of my sense input ? or my beliefs about my interpretations of my reactions ?
How is my experience and my mind separate ?
Isn't my physical/emotional experience greatly influenced by my memory of my previous experience?
Isn't most of my experience largely the result of my expectations ?
I don't think that I can give any more credibility to my experience as being related to truth than I can my beliefs.
Ok, I believe that nothing can be known with certainty. ( to know = see truth ?)(truth = objective fact ?)(fact = what actually IS ?)
I don't think (believe) that it matters. (I certainly can't know if it matters)
If truth is an ongoing interaction with the present (relating to “what is”) then truth is always new (it still could be the same truth)
Maybe “what is truth” should be “what is true”
Seeing what is “out there” that is an objective thing – truth is quite different to seeing what is inherently true in things!!
Seeing what is true in things is a way of seeing and seeing (here) is a metaphor for knowing.
This knowing transcends the thing. It becomes Experiencing the thing. (and so experience the dissolution of a boundary between the thing and you) and further investigation of the boundary between you and your name (ego – identity) the dissolution of which leaves you only as past thought patterns floating as memories on the ethers of now.
I have a feeling that truth is there to be ‘known’ by looking with the right kind of eyes. I think it isn’t something separate or different but a way of seeing ‘what is’ without the coloration of opinion – not that I can disappear opinion, but that I can see what coloration it causes (in myself)
If 1 plus 1 equals 2 then you would consider that to be a fact.
If I believe that 1 plus 1 equals 3 and I state my belief as fact, then, am I telling the truth?, My truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)