repressed memories

Anyway, statements that repressed memories do not exist are untrue... I know from experience.

I had assumed you had put me on ignore and was taken aback to see you respond to my post. Interesting.

BorisKitten wrote:

Anyway, statements that repressed memories do not exist are untrue... I know from experience.

There has never been a verifiable case where someone has "repressed" (i.e. sublimated into and retained in the subconscious) a traumatic childhood memory. That's not how memory works.

"Subconscious" and "unconscious" are Freudian constructs, not real things. As you know from reading Popper, Freudianism is a pseudo-science, as it is not susceptible to being disproved. As such, it makes no difference whether a memory is repressed into the unconscious or the subconscious. You might as well say that a memory is repressed into the magic green unicorn inside your brain.

BorisKitten wrote:
Anyway, statements that repressed memories do not exist are untrue... I know from experience.
----------------------------------------------------
There has never been a verifiable case where someone has "repressed" (i.e. sublimated into and retained in the subconscious) a traumatic childhood memory. That's not how memory works.

For example, right now I am "sublimating" my desire to throttle Rush Limbaugh.

Seriously, though, like you pointed out, these things are real.

The level of emotional significance of a memory correlates directly with the memory's veracity. Studies of subjective reports of memory show that memories of highly significant events are unusually accurate and stable over time.[12] The imprints of traumatic experiences appear to be qualitatively different from those of nontraumatic events. Traumatic memories may be coded differently than ordinary event memories, possibly because of alterations in attentional focusing or the fact that extreme emotional arousal interferes with the memory functions of the hippocampus.[12]

Although research on repressed memory is limited, a few studies have suggested that memories of trauma that are forgotten and later recalled have a similar accuracy rate as trauma memories that had not been forgotten.[2]

Elizabeth Loftus is one of the psychologists supporting the False Memory Syndrome Foundation.

In fact, she's one the FMSF's key specialists and a Mockingbird celebrity shrink.

For some reason, Loftus doesn't remember her childhood before age eight. I think she found her mother dead in the family pool. Odd case herself and she brings it to prominent cases of child abuse, too. She's had counter-suits against her for meddling in cases.

Here is Loftus' own memory trauma history from the article below-
"Elizabeth Loftus' mother drowned when Elizabeth was 14. Elizabeth kept a diary before that terrible day and after. The diary reveals a child who is desperately hurt but believes that one day she will get past missing her mother. She has not.

It is, she believes, what fuels her own workaholism and her desire, sometimes, to see shattered families made whole. To this day, she cannot mention her mother without tears. Loftus, the memory whiz, says she is hard-pressed to remember much about the woman she still misses.

A few years ago, Loftus was told that she was the one who had found her dead mother in the pool.

For 35 years, Loftus believed it was her Aunt Pearl who first saw her mother's lifeless body in the water. For several days, Loftus searched her own memory for proof to support the new information. It came. She reinterpreted everything that happened that day in a new way, building up the memory. The scene was re-created in her mind with her in it.

Then her uncle called to say he was mistaken. She never saw her mother dead."

In this particular case, it appears Loftus may have violated at least three ethical codes, research subject confidentiality, informed consent and dual relationships.

I had assumed you had put me on ignore
and was taken aback to see you respond to my post. Interesting.

dyslexia wrote:

I had assumed you had put me on ignore
and was taken aback to see you respond to my post. Interesting.

So far as I remember, I have never put u on Ignore
because u did not offend to the necessary degree for that to happen.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

dyslexia wrote:

I had assumed you had put me on ignore
and was taken aback to see you respond to my post. Interesting.

So far as I remember, I have never put u on Ignore
because u did not offend to the necessary degree for that to happen.

well david you certainly can't fault me for not trying.

well david you certainly can't fault me for not trying.