A recommendation for Bill

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.0523.0746)]

Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.0711)

For your new printing of B:CP I would modify the glossary to read;

Imagining: Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations as
present-time perceptual signals, in combinations that did not, [ and did ]
occur before.

I think the key is that you know that the combination did not occur in
the "real" world (otherwise you are confabulating.)

···

Remembering; Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations that [
only ] actually occurred before.

This is a bit clearer.

Happy flying,

Marc

--
Bruce Gregory lives with the poet and painter Gray Jacobik in the future
Canadian Province of New England.

www.joincanadanow.org

from [ Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.0711)]

For your new printing of B:CP I would modify the glossary to read;

Imagining: Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations as
present-time perceptual signals, in combinations that did not, [ and did ]
occur before.

Remembering; Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations that [
only ] actually occurred before.

This is a bit clearer.

Happy flying,

Marc

[From Bruce Nevin (2003.05.23 11:11 EDT)]

Bruce Gregory (2003.0523.0746)--

···

At 07:45 AM 5/23/2003, Bruce Gregory wrote:

Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.0711)--

For your new printing of B:CP I would modify the glossary to read;

Imagining: Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations as
present-time perceptual signals, in combinations that did not, [ and did ]
occur before.

I think the key is that you know that the combination did not occur in
the "real" world (otherwise you are confabulating.)

This makes it possible to distinguish confabulations that are stored in memory. They are still imaginary, but in the present moment they are recalled, not imagined.

How do we determine that a perception is veridical or imagined?

First, as has been noted, imagining is often vague about the details at the lower levels of the perceptual hierarchy.
       _______________________________________________
            Digression on vividness and attention
       �����������������������������������������������
At 07:32 PM 5/18/2003, Bill Powers wrote:

[From Bill Powers (2003.05.18.12613 MDT)]

I, too, find remembering and imagining considerably less vivid than
present-time perceiving. But people vary a great deal in this regard.

[...]

my hypothesis is that when we speak of
"vivid" imagination or memory, we are referring primarily to _low-order_
experiences, with the imagination loop closed at the sensation level for
hallucinations (I can't quite see how imagination could work at the
intensity level). Abstract remembering or imagining, on the other hand,
involves closing the loop at a much higher level, relationships or even
categories, so that the remembered material does not include any
lower-level perceptions. No color, taste, smell, and so forth, and no
motion or events either, perhaps.

The other dimension of vividness is the number of imagination connections
in effect at once, so that greater or smaller degrees of the total
conscious experience at a given level can come from present-time
perceptions, the rest being filled in from imagination/memory. But I
suspect that the order of perception involved has the most to do with what
we call vivid or realistic remembering and imagining.

Recall seems to me related to

1. The perceptions that were attended to during the experience.

Maybe what we were aware of in perception is what we can most easily be aware of in memory. Apparently it is not all that is remembered (Penfield). I wonder about the often demonstrated willingness of people to construct memories as part of what is called rationalization. Such memories appear to help one control high-level variables such as self-image and relationship to another.

3. Strength of affect associated with the experience.

However, this relative "strength" may be relative accessibility of the memory, using the emotion to address the memory.

As noted in B:CP (and of course many other places) particular perceptions can evoke memories of complex experiences of which they were part. It has been said that scents and odors are especially evocative of memories. People differ in their olfactory sensitivity. I am far less perceptive with my nose than my wife is, and an architect friend of ours can't even smell that his tenants' cats have peed in the solarium of his house -- not a great selling point.

       _______________________________________________
         End of digression on vividness and attention
       �����������������������������������������������
Often when people recall a particular configuration, event, transition, or relationship, the details of sensation and intensity are not included. Also as noted above, people vary in this respect, and some people imagine and remember in great detail.

In any case, this does not distinguish imaginings from hallucinations, which seem to be convincing in all details, although in some cases this may be a function of wanting them to be so, or wanting to report them so.

The bedrock of verification is intersubjective agreement with controls to ensure that the agreeing observers are perceiving the same variables in their shared environment.

Remembering; Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations that [
only ] actually occurred before.

Remembering; Replay of stored perceptual signals only in combinations that actually occurred before.

Imagining: Replay of stored perceptual signals, in combinations that did not occur before.

Caveats: Imaginings may be stored and recalled. This is Remembering of a perception that resulted from Imagining. Imagining always includes much remembering (of the perceptions that are combined in a novel way). Remembering probably includes more imagining that we might like to admit. Hence the claim that memories are constructed. In this terminological distinction lurks an idealization.

         /Bruce Nevin

[From Bill Powers (2003.05.23.0916 MDT)]

Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.0711)--

For your new printing of B:CP I would modify the glossary to read;

Imagining: Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations as
present-time perceptual signals, in combinations that did not, [ and did ]
occur before.

Remembering; Replay of stored perceptual signals in combinations that [
only ] actually occurred before.

I appreciate the suggestion and will work out something acceptable to both
of us. It may take a few more words to be clear about what I meant. Try this:

Remembering: the creation of a perceptual signal by combining replayed
lower-level recorded perceptual signals that were recorded at the same time
during the same experience. The result is that at both the lower level
where the recordings are replayed and at all higher levels receiving the
signals, experiences occur as if the original lower-order perceptions were
occurring again. Note that when we remember, there are often lower-order
perceptions involved that are from different experiences -- that is, part
of the memory is imagined (see _imagining_). There is a continuum between
pure remembering and pure imagining.

Imagining: the creation of a perceptual signal by combining replayed
lower-level recorded perceptual signals that were not recorded as part of
one common experience. The result is that the higher-order perceptual
signal does not correspond to anything that exists or has existed in the
person's past experience of the external world, although the lower-order
signals do individually correspond to past experiences. Imagining could
require learning a new higher-order perceptual input function, as in
learning to perceive a winged horse, where the memories of a wing and a
horse come from real experiences in the past, but not from the same experience.

That's wordier, but I hope clearer, Over to you.

I have recovered from my angry reaction to your words. How are you doing?

Best,

Bill P.

from [ Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.0941) ]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.0523.0746)]

I think the key is that you know that the combination did not occur in
the "real" world (otherwise you are confabulating.)

Yes. That is clear. Thanks for the help.

Marc

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.0523.1346)]

Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.1325)

As near as I can tell, you must be somewhere in the middle of the
Atlantic Ocean (Your posts are three hours later than E.D.T.) I
envision you on the deck of your yacht sipping a daquiri and
thinking profound thoughts...

from [ Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.1325)]

I appreciate the suggestion and will work out something acceptable to both
of us. It may take a few more words to be clear about what I meant. Try

this:

Remembering: the creation of a perceptual signal by combining replayed
lower-level recorded perceptual signals that were recorded at the same

time

during the same experience. The result is that at both the lower level
where the recordings are replayed and at all higher levels receiving the
signals, experiences occur as if the original lower-order perceptions were
occurring again. Note that when we remember, there are often lower-order
perceptions involved that are from different experiences -- that is, part
of the memory is imagined (see _imagining_). There is a continuum between
pure remembering and pure imagining.

Imagining: the creation of a perceptual signal by combining replayed
lower-level recorded perceptual signals that were not recorded as part of
one common experience. The result is that the higher-order perceptual
signal does not correspond to anything that exists or has existed in the
person's past experience of the external world, although the lower-order
signals do individually correspond to past experiences. Imagining could
require learning a new higher-order perceptual input function, as in
learning to perceive a winged horse, where the memories of a wing and a
horse come from real experiences in the past, but not from the same

experience.

That's wordier, but I hope clearer, Over to you.

Yes it is. Much clearer, and more helpful,both you and the meanings. I
appreciate both. Thank you

I have recovered from my angry reaction to your words. How are you doing?

I'm doin fine, Thanks for asking, glad your well.

Happy flying :slight_smile:

Marc

from [ Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.1557) ]

[From Bruce Gregory (2003.0523.1346)]

Marc Abrams (2003.05.23.1325)

As near as I can tell, you must be somewhere in the middle of the
Atlantic Ocean (Your posts are three hours later than E.D.T.) I
envision you on the deck of your yacht sipping a daquiri and
thinking profound thoughts...

If you substitute a diet coke for the daquiri you got me pegged. The xp os I
have is wonderful for time warps. I can go either back or forward in time
(usually in 3-4 hr increments) instantaneously. :slight_smile:

Marc