False Memories

What makes her a lead authority? She is in terms of her qualifications and experience compared to the rest of us, but its chasing the answers to a puzzle when everybody else has only 10% of the pieces;....what was that famous case she had, the guy still has a record becuase everyone else isnt convince, its all a fuzzy area. She can go in and prove this guy is very susceotible to false memories being implanted, but that doesnt tell us anything on whether or not what he was accused of was true

I ask the question because its a kind of double negative. Something proven to be false or (true) based on something that was dependant on context in the first place, not necessarily true.

The links you provided, they will give aspects of memory recall after the original event, but I can also dig up another dozen links showing up why that original aspect can not be trusted. Witness to a bank robbery as an example, can never really be relied upon, they will process it in many different ways, the event might have occured too fast for them to process properly, and half of them will just shit themselves, then convince themselves and others they have remembered correctly as a way of coping. There are biological influences with shock before the information even gets to the brain, the optic nerve will fill in gaps before visual input is even processed in the brain


But none of it has been conclusively proven, will still dont have much of an idea why dreams are, thus the influence of those memories getting replayed and reconfigured tens of thousands of times over decades whilst we are unconsciously aware. We still have no real clue what hypnosis is, there are still a dozen different theories

When it comes to hypnosis, why are some people far more susceptive than others. I'm reminded of kirsch and his non deceptive placebo effect I think it was called without googling. If a hypnotic state is just merely part or parts of the stage people go through when going from awake to asleep. If the mind implicitly trusts that input it feeds itself when we are alseep it will also implicitly trust input when half awake, to varying degrees in different people - or the short version; 20% of the population are running around in a daydream all the time, far more open to suggestion from all sources, not just from their hypnotherapist but also that Coca Cola Billboard on their daily commute

Then when it comes to trying to gather empirical data with something like hypnosis, we all have the same basic brain structures, with lower level feed back we all respond the same way, jab everyone in the knee and the brain will light up the same way, but at a higher level of complexity such as input from suggestions through hypnosis, the brain doesnt light up the same way, different parts of the brain are used by different people as backup for these functions. So one theory may get abandoned for half a century becuase there was no correlation, when there wasnt supposed to be any correlation in the first place. The short version again: we get stuck in a logical loop on theories too dependant on confirmation by empirical data

 

Don't worry about the dates, it's a gender thing!

 

So are we arguing or agreeing?