FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Childhood amnesia
Childhood amnesia
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"They would only look back on it fondly I'd imagine x" But they wouldn't really be remembering it in order to look back on it fondly? | |||
"They would only look back on it fondly I'd imagine x But they wouldn't really be remembering it in order to look back on it fondly?" You asked if it would have nasty side effects. I don't think so. My kids love listening to stories about the things they done when they were younger and love looking at old photos and old camcorder videos as did I when I was younger. Any time we watch them or look at old pictures its always a good laugh...don't really give it a thought what they actually remember but it's lovely when they do x | |||
| |||
" Consider a parent that repeatedly shows a child videos of things they did, that they would naturally forget. Could this mean that either the child will pretend to remember things they don't or even worse, develop false memories? Thoughts anyone? " How would it be a false memory, the child was there when it happened, OK the video is from a different perspective but often all at is required is a trigger to remember. | |||
"Back when I was young I liked looking through the photo album of me when I was wearing a brown knitted tank top with shades of orange rainbow on it. Do I remember the clothes as helped by the photo or do I just remember the photo? I don’t think it really matters" Yeah just think why the fuck did my mum knit that and make me wear it lol x | |||
" Consider a parent that repeatedly shows a child videos of things they did, that they would naturally forget. Could this mean that either the child will pretend to remember things they don't or even worse, develop false memories? Thoughts anyone? How would it be a false memory, the child was there when it happened, OK the video is from a different perspective but often all at is required is a trigger to remember. " The parent probably says "do you remember that trip to grandads house when you were 4?" "No" "Oh here's a video of you doing something there..." The child feels that they should remember and therefore pretends to remember. In the process of frankly making up a memory, they might insert negative as well as positive things. | |||
| |||
"So most people remember very little before age 2-4 and once you become an adult then most things before 10 are a bit fuzzy. This is natural. I was wondering whether the every increasing quantity of photos and videos that parents make of their children will end up confusing this natural process - it could have some nasty side effects. Consider a parent that repeatedly shows a child videos of things they did, that they would naturally forget. Could this mean that either the child will pretend to remember things they don't or even worse, develop false memories? Thoughts anyone? " If we can keep talk of children off Fab that'd be great | |||
" Consider a parent that repeatedly shows a child videos of things they did, that they would naturally forget. Could this mean that either the child will pretend to remember things they don't or even worse, develop false memories? Thoughts anyone? How would it be a false memory, the child was there when it happened, OK the video is from a different perspective but often all at is required is a trigger to remember. The parent probably says "do you remember that trip to grandads house when you were 4?" "No" "Oh here's a video of you doing something there..." The child feels that they should remember and therefore pretends to remember. In the process of frankly making up a memory, they might insert negative as well as positive things." Fuck knows. We just have a laugh when we watch them or look through pics x | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I am teh opposite. I don't have many memories from say age 20-30. I remember a lot from my childhood. I had a good one and it was very active and full of experiences so maybe that's why I remember a lot but not so much of my twenties." You know what they say, if you can remember the 60s you weren’t really there  | |||
| |||
"This already happens. I remember reading that scientists have found that most people already have false memories because of pictures but also because of stories parents/adults tell. Apparently lots of people *think* they remember things that they don't. I'm not sure that this would have a negative affect, though. Do you think it will?" I could see how it would. I know you aren't a fan of Dr Phil (you should be) but imagine the ability of parents to manipulate a version of events following a divorce (for example) or what might happen in cases of alledged abuses. I know photos and the like aren't new, but the scale of it might really mess with what people think they remember. It could also be good as well though. | |||
"Memories are not static records of experiences, such as a piece of film might create. Whenever we access them, they become opened to our fuller experience and they become new memories. I've got memories from 2 and 3 but I don't revisit them often, as I wish to preserve them in their earlier more pristine format. If we get our experiences subsequently joined with layers of new information, such as more photos, stories from people etc, then they will likely become modified. It's part of the beauty of our brains, coupled with what may be growing human wisdom over time." All very true, so do you see the potential for new kinds of problems due to the increased 'proof' of what actually happened? | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) " It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. | |||
" The mind isn't capable of dealing with "blanks" and makes up aspects to fill in. I've been involved in research of perceptual distortion and it's fascinating how the mind tricks you into believing your recollection of events. You as an adult are convinced of events now, and unless you have parents with bad intent I see no reason why this should be sinister." But with 43% of marriages ending in divorce, messy custody battles are common... (for example) | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. " Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful " They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse. | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse." I think the fact they were on Dr Phil says it all x | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse. I think the fact they were on Dr Phil says it all x" Don't be dissin' Dr Phi | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse." But that's different isn't it... That's making stuff up, not being shown stuff that happened and was caught in camera. | |||
| |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse. But that's different isn't it... That's making stuff up, not being shown stuff that happened and was caught in camera. " It's part of the big picture, one of the things the guy was accused of was wearing tiny shorts so his dick would fall out of them when he sat down. So you can imagine being shown lots of photos of some weird guy wearing short shorts and then "look how he always wanted you to sit on his knee..." | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse. But that's different isn't it... That's making stuff up, not being shown stuff that happened and was caught in camera. It's part of the big picture, one of the things the guy was accused of was wearing tiny shorts so his dick would fall out of them when he sat down. So you can imagine being shown lots of photos of some weird guy wearing short shorts and then "look how he always wanted you to sit on his knee..."" How the fuck did we go from "do you remember that" when you were 4 to a guys dick falling out his shorts. Jesus christ I'm actually fuckin buckled here hahaha x | |||
"Parents have been taking pics a relaying stories if what their kids did as babies for decades. How is this any different these days other than moving images? (although video cameras have been around a while now too) It's the scale that's changed. It's gone from 20-60 pictures and maybe 20 minutes of video representing your childhood, to a day by day account of the colour of your shite, or whever else people post on facebook these days. Yeah I get that it's kind of upscale slightly lol but I still don't think that seeing images of things people don't remember is going to be particularly harmful They have episodes of Dr Phil where adults 'remembered' parental abuse that didn't happen. Although to be clear, there were inappropriate moments that happened (parents with no boundaries) but not abuse. But that's different isn't it... That's making stuff up, not being shown stuff that happened and was caught in camera. It's part of the big picture, one of the things the guy was accused of was wearing tiny shorts so his dick would fall out of them when he sat down. So you can imagine being shown lots of photos of some weird guy wearing short shorts and then "look how he always wanted you to sit on his knee..."" Really?! | |||
| |||
" The mind isn't capable of dealing with "blanks" and makes up aspects to fill in. I've been involved in research of perceptual distortion and it's fascinating how the mind tricks you into believing your recollection of events. " When i was young, i remember a child minder taking me to an amazingly huge house. As I've become older, I've started to doubt how many of the features it really had vrs what i might have made up. I seem to remember a servants staircase, but i might have inserted that! | |||
"Memories are not static records of experiences, such as a piece of film might create. Whenever we access them, they become opened to our fuller experience and they become new memories. I've got memories from 2 and 3 but I don't revisit them often, as I wish to preserve them in their earlier more pristine format. If we get our experiences subsequently joined with layers of new information, such as more photos, stories from people etc, then they will likely become modified. It's part of the beauty of our brains, coupled with what may be growing human wisdom over time. All very true, so do you see the potential for new kinds of problems due to the increased 'proof' of what actually happened?" These processes are increasingly being understood far better than they used to be. I think that there are some key points here: 1. Memories aren't like film records, that can remain intact and provide a sequential record of what has been filmed/happened. 2. Peoples' memories, because of 1 above, can't be relied upon as accurate unchanging records of experiences, whether they cover visual, sound or other sensory information. 3. 'Proof' (your word) is something that's better probably thought of as evidence. Memories from children and adults are subject to the same reliability issues as evidence. I am not involved with criminal/forensic fields, so these are my opinions. As I mentioned in my earlier post, each time we access/recall a memory, it is in effect recreated, before being subsequently laid down into memory again. If we recall a memory 5 times, it has the potential to have been modified 5 times, just from our conscious efforts. On top of this conscious recall, our memories are not locked in vaults, with them being frozen and not subject to any further adjustment from our unconscious processes. Our unconscious minds have a huge role in the management of our memories and this may mean that they are adjusted over time. We know that much of the consolidation of our memories happens after the event: people having accidents often don't remember things that happened prior to the accident, it is believed because this memory consolidation process doesn't occur effectively whilst they're in trauma, potentially with their brain processes disrupted. If we remember a positive old experience and learn something about it that adjusts our opinions, such as someone in it is horrible, then the memory can be 'fine'- tuned to become an unpleasant memory, even if nothing of the actual event has changed. Perhaps it was an experience with an ex, that seemed lovely but we adjust our perspective, when we've learned something about them, or we dislike them. It's a complex field and we still know very little about brains and minds imo. | |||
 | |||
"Memories are not static records of experiences, such as a piece of film might create. Whenever we access them, they become opened to our fuller experience and they become new memories. I've got memories from 2 and 3 but I don't revisit them often, as I wish to preserve them in their earlier more pristine format. If we get our experiences subsequently joined with layers of new information, such as more photos, stories from people etc, then they will likely become modified. It's part of the beauty of our brains, coupled with what may be growing human wisdom over time. All very true, so do you see the potential for new kinds of problems due to the increased 'proof' of what actually happened? These processes are increasingly being understood far better than they used to be. I think that there are some key points here: 1. Memories aren't like film records, that can remain intact and provide a sequential record of what has been filmed/happened. 2. Peoples' memories, because of 1 above, can't be relied upon as accurate unchanging records of experiences, whether they cover visual, sound or other sensory information. 3. 'Proof' (your word) is something that's better probably thought of as evidence. Memories from children and adults are subject to the same reliability issues as evidence. I am not involved with criminal/forensic fields, so these are my opinions. As I mentioned in my earlier post, each time we access/recall a memory, it is in effect recreated, before being subsequently laid down into memory again. If we recall a memory 5 times, it has the potential to have been modified 5 times, just from our conscious efforts. On top of this conscious recall, our memories are not locked in vaults, with them being frozen and not subject to any further adjustment from our unconscious processes. Our unconscious minds have a huge role in the management of our memories and this may mean that they are adjusted over time. We know that much of the consolidation of our memories happens after the event: people having accidents often don't remember things that happened prior to the accident, it is believed because this memory consolidation process doesn't occur effectively whilst they're in trauma, potentially with their brain processes disrupted. If we remember a positive old experience and learn something about it that adjusts our opinions, such as someone in it is horrible, then the memory can be 'fine'- tuned to become an unpleasant memory, even if nothing of the actual event has changed. Perhaps it was an experience with an ex, that seemed lovely but we adjust our perspective, when we've learned something about them, or we dislike them. It's a complex field and we still know very little about brains and minds imo." So i agree with all of that, but this is not widely understood so what I'm wondering is whether the increased quantity of things that people consider proof (e.g. photos) will lead to an increase in people's ability to manipulate other peoples memories? | |||
"Memories are not static records of experiences, such as a piece of film might create. Whenever we access them, they become opened to our fuller experience and they become new memories. I've got memories from 2 and 3 but I don't revisit them often, as I wish to preserve them in their earlier more pristine format. If we get our experiences subsequently joined with layers of new information, such as more photos, stories from people etc, then they will likely become modified. It's part of the beauty of our brains, coupled with what may be growing human wisdom over time. All very true, so do you see the potential for new kinds of problems due to the increased 'proof' of what actually happened? These processes are increasingly being understood far better than they used to be. I think that there are some key points here: 1. Memories aren't like film records, that can remain intact and provide a sequential record of what has been filmed/happened. 2. Peoples' memories, because of 1 above, can't be relied upon as accurate unchanging records of experiences, whether they cover visual, sound or other sensory information. 3. 'Proof' (your word) is something that's better probably thought of as evidence. Memories from children and adults are subject to the same reliability issues as evidence. I am not involved with criminal/forensic fields, so these are my opinions. As I mentioned in my earlier post, each time we access/recall a memory, it is in effect recreated, before being subsequently laid down into memory again. If we recall a memory 5 times, it has the potential to have been modified 5 times, just from our conscious efforts. On top of this conscious recall, our memories are not locked in vaults, with them being frozen and not subject to any further adjustment from our unconscious processes. Our unconscious minds have a huge role in the management of our memories and this may mean that they are adjusted over time. We know that much of the consolidation of our memories happens after the event: people having accidents often don't remember things that happened prior to the accident, it is believed because this memory consolidation process doesn't occur effectively whilst they're in trauma, potentially with their brain processes disrupted. If we remember a positive old experience and learn something about it that adjusts our opinions, such as someone in it is horrible, then the memory can be 'fine'- tuned to become an unpleasant memory, even if nothing of the actual event has changed. Perhaps it was an experience with an ex, that seemed lovely but we adjust our perspective, when we've learned something about them, or we dislike them. It's a complex field and we still know very little about brains and minds imo. So i agree with all of that, but this is not widely understood so what I'm wondering is whether the increased quantity of things that people consider proof (e.g. photos) will lead to an increase in people's ability to manipulate other peoples memories?" I think that people influence peoples' memories anyway - without meaning to. Random stuff going on could do the same. The greater the amount of stuff around, it does seem sensible that there are more things that could influence memories becoming 'adjusted'. The good news is that we can only have an increased understanding of the human mind and its workings over time, as well as professionals/courts etc also having access to the same expertise. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
