(2019-12-18, 05:54 PM)fls Wrote: Interestingly, van Lommel's statements were already demonstrably wrong on the basis of the studies he referenced in support of those statements. We had a discussion, on the Skeptiko mind/body forum several years ago, where some of the forum members actually looked at the references (instead of taking van Lommel's word for it). It was eye-opening for them to discover that the studies did not show zero EEG activity (https://forum.mind-energy.net/forum/skep...tudy/page2 - please note that a number of posts were deleted by the mods as Alex wanted to move away from discussions about evidence). I contacted van Lommel about this and he admitted that it was his (unsupported) opinion that the EEG activity seen was inadequate, and that his statements about "flat EEG" were meant to convey that.
I agree that ongoing research, which continues to show blood flow, oxygenation, and activity associated with CPR, adds more nails to the coffin. But that coffin lid seems to have been closed quite a while ago.
We also had a discussion here earlier this year on the subjects who were in position to see hidden targets, but did not, in Penny Sartori's study.
On the contrary, 80% of the patients in that poster had zero electrical activity even with prolonged CPR. The rest had seizures and discharges and a couple had some alpha waves (during prolonged CPR). How does that explain veridical out of body experiences ? They report actions and behaviour/objects which are completely out of their (even potential) gaze. They lie on their back with their eyes closed facing upwards. The only thing they could potentially see is what is directly above them even if their eyes were wide open.
(2019-12-18, 05:21 PM)fls Wrote: Ah, I see what you are objecting to. I agree that if I hadn't stipulated that the dream about the alarm clock was initiated by the sound of the house alarm, we would not know that there was an implicit memory in my example (because, as I mentioned earlier, a dream about an alarm is not specific enough on its own).
However, I specifically gave you that information, because I wasn't distinguishing between whether or not we know about an implicit memory (that was something which came up later), but was distinguishing between implicit and explicit memory.
So it looks like you agree with my original contention that if the dream about the alarm clock was initiated by the house alarm, it would represent an implicit memory. We just wouldn't know that it was an implicit memory unless we had some sort of test to look for implicit memories, or somebody (like the author of the example) gave us that information. Contrast this with the study I referenced earlier about dreams of Tetris. In that case, any mention of falling blocks in the dream mentation was assumed to be an implicit memory about playing Tetris, because that particular scenario was specific enough on its own.
Linda
There is no implicit memory demonstrated by your two examples, both show purely explicit memory - both are consciously recalled. That's the limit of what you can say about your examples. We are after all talking about recalling a detailed memory involving an alarm clock. That recalled memory is explicit, it can never be defined as implicit memory. It doesn't meet the correct definition for implicit memory.
As for the second part no, I don't agree with you that "if the dream about the alarm clock was initiated by the house alarm, it would represent an implicit memory". For the reason I've already given within the paragraph above... shorthand... the conscious recall of memories involving alarm clocks are explicit memories, not implicit memories.
More generally, I don't think the Tetris paper offers much if any support for your examples either. The author of the Tetris paper wasn't investigating the injection of sensory information into normal peoples dreams. The author was investigating amnesiac recall during sleep, of very repetitive experiences (hours spent playing Tetris) that took place hours before sleep was initiated. The Tetris paper is not a study about the injection of real-time sensory data (house alarms) into normal peoples dreams. Additionally, there were alot of assumptions made in the paper which I'm not sure I agree with.
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
Reply
2
The following 2 users Like Max_B's post:2 users Like Max_B's post • sbu, Sci
(2019-12-18, 09:48 AM)Raf999 Wrote: Constant failures from studies, Van Lommel's being wrong on rhe zero EEG and blood flow during CPR, unrealible accounts on what is considered veridical OBEs, mostly.
There is a huge gap between self reported NDEs, and what happens in studies like AWARE. I really can't trust that anymore, I need proof and investigators are usually proponents, so that is gonna be biased.
Also, the fact that Cherylee Black's "powers" are considered a NDE proof really distresses me.
Being agnostic on this subject - I don't wholly agree with this characterization, but I also don't see that anything's come along to make any of this different than it's been for the past year. You've given many full-throated statements in support of NDEs in that time, some fairly recently, so it's rather odd to see you shift gears so abruptly. I've said this before - with respect, you seem prone to change your views rather impulsively, on minimal input. I sometimes fall into that myself, so I can empathize, but it doesn't strike me that either view could be that deeply held.
(2019-12-18, 05:54 PM)fls Wrote: Interestingly, van Lommel's statements were already demonstrably wrong on the basis of the studies he referenced in support of those statements. We had a discussion, on the Skeptiko mind/body forum several years ago, where some of the forum members actually looked at the references (instead of taking van Lommel's word for it). It was eye-opening for them to discover that the studies did not show zero EEG activity (https://forum.mind-energy.net/forum/skep...tudy/page2 - please note that a number of posts were deleted by the mods as Alex wanted to move away from discussions about evidence). I contacted van Lommel about this and he admitted that it was his (unsupported) opinion that the EEG activity seen was inadequate, and that his statements about "flat EEG" were meant to convey that.
I agree that ongoing research, which continues to show blood flow, oxygenation, and activity associated with CPR, adds more nails to the coffin. But that coffin lid seems to have been closed quite a while ago.
We also had a discussion here earlier this year on the subjects who were in position to see hidden targets, but did not, in Penny Sartori's study.
(2019-12-18, 09:18 PM)Max_B Wrote: More generally, I don't think the Tetris paper offers much if any support for your examples either. The author of the Tetris paper wasn't investigating the injection of sensory information into normal peoples dreams. The author was investigating amnesiac recall during sleep, of very repetitive experiences (hours spent playing Tetris) that took place hours before sleep was initiated. The Tetris paper is not a study about the injection of real-time sensory data (house alarms) into normal peoples dreams. Additionally, there were alot of assumptions made in the paper which I'm not sure I agree with.
Both are examples of implicit memories from sensory data (I did not specify that the sound of the house alarm was real-time or contemporaneous with the dream, although whether or not implicit memories are expressed near the time they are formed, or later, is irrelevant) which were expressed in dreams. In neither case are there any conscious memories about the sensory experience of playing Tetris or of hearing a house alarm.
It is also irrelevant (just like in the Tetris study), that mention of dream mentation is an explicit process, just like completing a word stem is an explicit process. How an implicit memory is expressed (if ever) is not relevant to where/how the memories are encoded compared to conscious memories. Almost any expression of an implicit memory probably involves conscious processes in some way - like a choice based on preference or singing along to a song on the radio.
(2019-12-19, 12:47 PM)fls Wrote: Both are examples of implicit memories from sensory data...
Nope, as I've explained before I don't agree with your opinions... There is no implicit memory demonstrated by your two examples, both show purely explicit memory - both are consciously recalled. That's the limit of what you can say about your examples. I'll just stress again that you are talking about a detailed memory involving an alarm clock. That recalled memory is explicit.... it's declarative "I saw an alarm clock... etc.", consciously recalled memories containing detailed experiences of alarm clocks can never be defined as implicit memory. They don't meet the correct definition for implicit memory. That is just a fact.
I'm conscious that I'm repeating the actual definition of implicit and explicit memories, and that you seem to have some objection with how I define your examples. It doesn't sound like a subject we're likely to agree on... so I'll leave the discussion here, in disagreement.
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.
Reply
(This post was last modified: 2019-12-19, 02:53 PM by Max_B.)
Max, I'm curious (and perhaps it would help the discussion) but could you give me an example of what an implicit memory might look like? I'm very new to this subject so trying to learn a bit here.
(2019-12-19, 02:50 PM)Silence Wrote: Max, I'm curious (and perhaps it would help the discussion) but could you give me an example of what an implicit memory might look like? I'm very new to this subject so trying to learn a bit here.
No problem. There is a brief explanation and a table, separating declarative (explicit) memory, from non-declarative (implicit) memory, with some examples, at the start of this Wiki article on Explicit memory...
![[-]](https://psiencequest.net/forums/images/collapse.png)
Mastodon