2004-07-16 - 4:25 p.m.
So with more looking, I find more memories. Was it that I did not want to see them before, or did it simply take time for me to come up with my history? Both, neither? Are there evil aliens broadcasting negative thoughts into the clammy parts of my brain, causing me to regress? I certainly hope not.
So there is this past thing, and we can miss it. Memories are markers of events, and lessons learned, but they are not the events or lessons themselves. They are tabs and context. We flip though the pages of our mind when people ask "Why this?" and find the appropriate page, and share the information stored there. Citing ones sources, so to speak.
But we can be academic, and fall in love with the written memory, rather than the living memory, and forget that the two are the same. Memory shifts on us, and given that it is the list of tabs, there are no external references, other than to check our books against other peoples. But we can write our memories into there books over time, by accident.
A (which does not equal A): (Year:1997)Do you remember xyz, B?
B (Which does equal C):(Year:1997) No, are you sure you didn't make up xyz?
A:(year 2007) Do you remember xyz, B?
B:(year 2007) Maybe, kind of, but I am fuzzy on it.
B:(Year 2017) A, Do you remember xyz?
A:(Year 2017) Oh yeah! Wasn't that great!! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
I am pretty sure about the things I have actually done, but things I was involved in get fuzzier for me. I think of the group doing them, and I am not certain if I was there at all.
So we fall to giving into memory as we do senses. I have this sense, and since my sense is the only knowledge I have, I must trust this sense.
So memory and senses can be distorted. Is this important? Perhaps the acceptance of these ideas are all that is important. Or maybe it would be better to think the exact opposite. That our senses and memory are perfect, and that problems with matching them come from other phenomena which we brush off as vagueries of self. But that is crazy talk, and while I love a good gibber, I find it hard to lead people into my madness. They have enough of their own, I assume. Or perhaps madness is the ultimate expression of self, like common poetry. Nevermind, this ship is sinking.
SO we build memory, and we cross reference experiences and lessons, and goals arise. We evaluate personal experience and try to draw ideas out of it. We build superstructures and substructures of being from memories. (I choose memories, because I find experiences aren't extrapolated until they are on the way to memory. In the moment, I generally find myself lost in experience, and unable to interpret the moment at the moment. I amy be lying though, and simply not remember the experience of interpreting the moment in the moment. This is obviously past moment interpolation as I doubt my mind, if placed into the moment of typing would find much in the way of lessons to draw. Other than I tend towards awkward sentence construction. I blame it on the Greeks.)
At this point I believe I have been analysing memory for too long. Why? The argument I just proposed implements memory as the corner stone of ontology.
