to grok memory

[Advocate]

Repetition is the bedrock of memory. memory = repetition If you want to remember it better, practice repetition in a variety of circumstances. </practical>

Neurons that fire together, wire together. Memory is distributed. It is the probability matrix of the feedback loop. Neurons that fired in sequence in the past are more likely to do so again in the future. When your attention moves into that area again, your memory is that those patterns which fire now were most likely to have done so most frequently or most strongly, so that's the thing that is salient. In cases where you didn't care much, the memory is weak because the neurons didn't connect strongly. If you think about something a lot, even if it's no big deal, that path becomes engraved.

[commonsense]

Repetition is the bedrock of memory. memory = repetition If you want to remember it better, practice repetition in a variety of circumstances. </practical>

Neurons that fire together, wire together. Memory is distributed. It is the probability matrix of the feedback loop. Neurons that fired in sequence in the past are more likely to do so again in the future. When your attention moves into that area again, your memory is that those patterns which fire now were most likely to have done so most frequently or most strongly, so that's the thing that is salient. In cases where you didn't care much, the memory is weak because the neurons didn't connect strongly. If you think about something a lot, even if it's no big deal, that path becomes engraved.

All very true. Memory may also be viewed as the storage place of past knowledge and experiences.

[Maia]

I think grok is a very ugly word, from Stranger in a Strange Land (Heinlein), a rather over-rated book, in my opinion.

As for memory, I read somewhere that each memory is changed, every time you access it. A scary thought.

[commonsense]

As for memory, I read somewhere that each memory is changed, every time you access it. A scary thought.

Actually, that accounts for distorted memories. A re-access (I.e. a memory of a memory) may not always be identical to the previous access or the original memory.

[Atla]

Repetition is the bedrock of memory. memory = repetition If you want to remember it better, practice repetition in a variety of circumstances. </practical>

Neurons that fire together, wire together. Memory is distributed. It is the probability matrix of the feedback loop. Neurons that fired in sequence in the past are more likely to do so again in the future. When your attention moves into that area again, your memory is that those patterns which fire now were most likely to have done so most frequently or most strongly, so that's the thing that is salient. In cases where you didn't care much, the memory is weak because the neurons didn't connect strongly. If you think about something a lot, even if it's no big deal, that path becomes engraved.

Just out of curiosity, what is the point of your "grok" snippets? I've been looking at a few of them and I found them too short and oversimplified to say anything about them. This one for example, Repetition is the bedrock of memory. memory = repetition

What's the point of saying that? The bedrock of memory may be seen as the ability to form and recall memories. Some people even have photographic memories so they don't need repetition. So in this sense memory is not repetition.

Yes from a more "practical" point of view, we can say that "Repetition creates the master." Repetition strengthens the memories, although may also slightly alter them.

what is saying 'memory = repetition' good for?

[Advocate]

[quote=Atla post_id=675909 time=1698470208 user_id=15497]
[quote=Advocate post_id=592872 time=1661875818 user_id=15238]
Repetition is the bedrock of memory. memory = repetition If you want to remember it better, practice repetition in a variety of circumstances. </practical>

Neurons that fire together, wire together. Memory is distributed. It is the probability matrix of the feedback loop. Neurons that fired in sequence in the past are more likely to do so again in the future. When your attention moves into that area again, your memory is that those patterns which fire now were most likely to have done so most frequently or most strongly, so that's the thing that is salient. In cases where you didn't care much, the memory is weak because the neurons didn't connect strongly. If you think about something a lot, even if it's no big deal, that path becomes engraved.
[/quote]
Just out of curiosity, what is the point of your "grok" snippets? I've been looking at a few of them and I found them too short and oversimplified to say anything about them. This one for example, Repetition is the bedrock of memory. memory = repetition

What's the point of saying that? The bedrock of memory may be seen as the ability to form and recall memories. Some people even have photographic memories so they don't need repetition. So in this sense memory is not repetition.

Yes from a more "practical" point of view, we can say that "Repetition creates the master." Repetition strengthens the memories, although may also slightly alter them.

what is saying 'memory = repetition' good for?
[/quote]

An answer is a framework of understanding. If you prefer another, please point to it. As for photographic memory, nobody understands it. It's apparently not the same phenomenon as ordinary memory and shouldn't be conflated. Also it differs between auditory and visual so it can be effected by aphantasia, for instance.

[Atla]

An answer is a framework of understanding.

Answer to what? And how is an answer by itself a framework of understanding?

memory = memory, why do we need to equate it with something else?

If you prefer another, please point to it.

maybe memory = remembering

memory = repetition obviously doesn't make much sense. Some memory doesn't need repetetion. And there are many kinds of repetitions that have nothing to do with memory.

As for photographic memory, nobody understands it. It's apparently not the same phenomenon as ordinary memory and shouldn't be conflated. Also it differs between auditory and visual so it can be effected by aphantasia, for instance.

But it's still a form of memory

[Iwannaplato]

An answer is a framework of understanding.

That's a fine response as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far. He asked what the use was. How do you imagine someone using you short 'essay' on memory? Also the focus on repetition is misleading I think. We have many one off memories and some of our clearest memories are of single experiences.

Memorizing for tests certainly can be enhanced by repetition. Repetition certainly helps in language learning, Repetition has a lot to do with skills training. But then all the episodic memory need not be like this.

I am not sure exactly what Atla was getting at with his question, but one might easily wonder what use such a pared down oversimplified way of grokking memory would be for, the use of it. We can go to page long descriptions of memory and get a more nuanced presentation. And then longer works for something more thorough.

This pithy level seems doomed to being misleading by what it leaves out.

[Advocate]

[quote=Iwannaplato post_id=675980 time=1698501141 user_id=3619]
[quote=Advocate post_id=675962 time=1698497515 user_id=15238]
An answer is a framework of understanding. [/quote]That's a fine response as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far. He asked what the use was. How do you imagine someone using you short 'essay' on memory? Also the focus on repetition is misleading I think. We have many one off memories and some of our clearest memories are of single experiences.

Memorizing for tests certainly can be enhanced by repetition. Repetition certainly helps in language learning, Repetition has a lot to do with skills training. But then all the episodic memory need not be like this.

I am not sure exactly what Atla was getting at with his question, but one might easily wonder what use such a pared down oversimplified way of grokking memory would be for, the use of it. We can go to page long descriptions of memory and get a more nuanced presentation. And then longer works for something more thorough.

This pithy level seems doomed to being misleading by what it leaves out.
[/quote]

If you don't want a consise answer that fits most cases, then go read a whole book that deals with exceptions. That's not the project here. Is there a better explanation of what memory is and how it works? Then posit it.

I expounded a little but the root is "neurons that fire together wire together", and that's True. The more you think about it, the stronger the memory becomes, despite how strong it was initially or how strong it remains, or the fact that it becomes confabulated.

[Iwannaplato]

If you don't want a consise answer that fits most cases, then go read a whole book that deals with exceptions. That's not the project here. Is there a better explanation of what memory is and how it works? Then posit it.

This isn't an answer. In the context of someone who claims that their philosophical ability gives them ownership of the universe, it would seem like some use for what they are doing in philosophy would be easy to explain. Further the memory of things that have happened to us is not some exception, that's a core part of memory.
Googling produces all sorts of definitions and explanations of memory, coming at the issue from many different emphases. Googling memory and repetition will find all sorts of explanations in a variety of lengths and degrees of toughness to understand for the lay reader. The core idea you have is neither new nor better put.

I mean another poster putting something like your OP up...fine. They want to emphasis one important aspect of memory, leave out the different types of memory, for example. Fine.

But it is precisely this kind of short definition/explanations post that is supposed to demonstrate not just that you are the best philosopher in the world, but via this own the world.

Why?

Do you think anyone here is unaware of how repetition affects memories and learning?
All anyone would have to do to create an equivalent to this post would be to mull over memory or pull out a small piece of a page long explanation of memory.

But who cares, right? What does it matter? Well in your case it's not like I am concerned about what will happen due to your sense of yourself as the best philosopher in the world. Or the world's owner.

But in general, the process through which people self-evaulate their way to grandiosity is interesting and important, because some of these people manage to create followers, and their sense of self-greatness and entitlement can lead to serious problems.

So, in the specific case here in PN, it's interesting to see how this sense of grandiosity and entitlement both forms and then is impervious to feedback (if it is).

So, I'm not a customer complaining that your short explanation is not something else. At root it's wondering how you come to the conclusions about yourself and your work and remain, so far, impervious.

Perhaps understanding that would help understand the people who become serious problems but have a similar pattern.

[Advocate]

[quote=Iwannaplato post_id=676138 time=1698557608 user_id=3619]
[quote=Advocate post_id=675986 time=1698501812 user_id=15238]
If you don't want a consise answer that fits most cases, then go read a whole book that deals with exceptions. That's not the project here. Is there a better explanation of what memory is and how it works? Then posit it. [/quote] This isn't an answer. In the context of someone who claims that their philosophical ability gives them ownership of the universe, it would seem like some use for what they are doing in philosophy would be easy to explain. Further the memory of things that have happened to us is not some exception, that's a core part of memory.
Googling produces all sorts of definitions and explanations of memory, coming at the issue from many different emphases. Googling memory and repetition will find all sorts of explanations in a variety of lengths and degrees of toughness to understand for the lay reader. The core idea you have is neither new nor better put.

I mean another poster putting something like your OP up...fine. They want to emphasis one important aspect of memory, leave out the different types of memory, for example. Fine.

But it is precisely this kind of short definition/explanations post that is supposed to demonstrate not just that you are the best philosopher in the world, but via this own the world.

Why?

Do you think anyone here is unaware of how repetition affects memories and learning?
All anyone would have to do to create an equivalent to this post would be to mull over memory or pull out a small piece of a page long explanation of memory.

But who cares, right? What does it matter? Well in your case it's not like I am concerned about what will happen due to your sense of yourself as the best philosopher in the world. Or the world's owner.

But in general, the process through which people self-evaulate their way to grandiosity is interesting and important, because some of these people manage to create followers, and their sense of self-greatness and entitlement can lead to serious problems.

So, in the specific case here in PN, it's interesting to see how this sense of grandiosity and entitlement both forms and then is impervious to feedback (if it is).

So, I'm not a customer complaining that your short explanation is not something else. At root it's wondering how you come to the conclusions about yourself and your work and remain, so far, impervious.

Perhaps understanding that would help understand the people who become serious problems but have a similar pattern.
[/quote]

This post is about memory, not me.