Subjective long term memory
I've touched on this before, but I felt it was worth mentioning again.
Memory is a fickle beast, apt to trip you up as save your bacon. I find that perfect recall of the most mundane and useless things (witty anecdotes that only I find funny for example) is a given, but strangely word for word transcripts of things said in conversation or heated argument several months ago are sadly lacking.
Although I will remember the event, the likelihood is that I will remember the general outline of what my view was, and some of the logical argument. And if I'm really lucky small snippets word for word or the sense of outrage at some of the really wacko sophistry that I heard.
Obviously I am very unlucky in this regard, either perfect recall is attainable with two X chromosomes, or all of my ex-girlfriends and my ex-wife were blessed with a stupendously good memory.
Of course... Thinking about it, it could be the case that they were inventing what was said in line with their own vague recollections, and trying to pass their interpretation as verbatim fact... Worse they could have been making up facts to fit their story... But that would be unethical surely? Lying... Surely not?
This reconstructionism does seem to fit the model, I have been accused of sympathising with the Nazis, of being a racist (amusingly this came from my wife, who is black, and guess what dear reader, I'm white) and in fact looking back on it, I have been accused of holding pretty much every diametrically opposed position to the ones I usually espouse... How odd!
Gosh, I'm seeing another pattern here... Its almost like, further analysis of my earlier observation on upset, would indicate the second response the "Historic Retrospective" is just a subset of the first option "Random Criticism", the whole point of the tactic is to achieve the end result, namely, "I was upset, now you are too".
But notably this tactic is far far cleverer in usage. By deliberately choosing to fight on a battle plain covered by the fog of time, my chances of a direct hit are being reduced dramatically, while the chances of receiving the same are massively enchanced. Even when I have claimed a surgical strike, I was told, "Nope, nice try, but my forces where never there, I never said that, I said X". And yet, when a crushing blow is delivered and I claim the same defense, I was told, "Oh no, I can see through the fog of time, your forces are there, you never said Y, you said Anti-Y, consider your army wiped out".
Again I assert, at no point must you allow yourself to be drawn into an argument relating to any facts more than three months old. Be safe, try to get this limit down to a single month, and if you are striving for perfection go for a week. The superhuman would be advised to go for a day, but frankly you haven't a hope in hell, but set the bar high and you never know.
Hmmm, food for thought.
Memory is a fickle beast, apt to trip you up as save your bacon. I find that perfect recall of the most mundane and useless things (witty anecdotes that only I find funny for example) is a given, but strangely word for word transcripts of things said in conversation or heated argument several months ago are sadly lacking.
Although I will remember the event, the likelihood is that I will remember the general outline of what my view was, and some of the logical argument. And if I'm really lucky small snippets word for word or the sense of outrage at some of the really wacko sophistry that I heard.
Obviously I am very unlucky in this regard, either perfect recall is attainable with two X chromosomes, or all of my ex-girlfriends and my ex-wife were blessed with a stupendously good memory.
Of course... Thinking about it, it could be the case that they were inventing what was said in line with their own vague recollections, and trying to pass their interpretation as verbatim fact... Worse they could have been making up facts to fit their story... But that would be unethical surely? Lying... Surely not?
This reconstructionism does seem to fit the model, I have been accused of sympathising with the Nazis, of being a racist (amusingly this came from my wife, who is black, and guess what dear reader, I'm white) and in fact looking back on it, I have been accused of holding pretty much every diametrically opposed position to the ones I usually espouse... How odd!
Gosh, I'm seeing another pattern here... Its almost like, further analysis of my earlier observation on upset, would indicate the second response the "Historic Retrospective" is just a subset of the first option "Random Criticism", the whole point of the tactic is to achieve the end result, namely, "I was upset, now you are too".
But notably this tactic is far far cleverer in usage. By deliberately choosing to fight on a battle plain covered by the fog of time, my chances of a direct hit are being reduced dramatically, while the chances of receiving the same are massively enchanced. Even when I have claimed a surgical strike, I was told, "Nope, nice try, but my forces where never there, I never said that, I said X". And yet, when a crushing blow is delivered and I claim the same defense, I was told, "Oh no, I can see through the fog of time, your forces are there, you never said Y, you said Anti-Y, consider your army wiped out".
Again I assert, at no point must you allow yourself to be drawn into an argument relating to any facts more than three months old. Be safe, try to get this limit down to a single month, and if you are striving for perfection go for a week. The superhuman would be advised to go for a day, but frankly you haven't a hope in hell, but set the bar high and you never know.
Hmmm, food for thought.
posted by C at 9:00 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home