If that were the case, you wouldn’t just remember things a little wrong, you’d try and recall your name and instead be remembering a field trip you took in 3rd grade.
You are implying that the process must be error-prone? I don’t see how that follows.
I figure that which is written and rewritten is addresses. To memories and some kind of ambient idea-objects.
Persecution without explanation. Evil in one context (doubley evil, by association, even), accepted in another. I point out that incongruity.
How can I make it plainer?
Getting dogpiled by a bunch of lukewarm jellyfish is hardly roasting.
Clear as mud
Assuming multiple wishes, the first wish might be to know the ideal wishes.
Which might reincarnate you as an impoverished leper of course (for the growth experience)
Are sub/dom politically biased?
There are exceptions of course. And maybe that’s one of them. Or maybe it isn’t.
Then replace “wrong” with “arrived at in a nonreasonable way”.
That’s a special case.
Most of popular thought is not that.
It’s expected. It’s the 2 or 3 thoughtful responses that I’m looking for.
Such careful thinking, such scientificness, is rare as hen’s teeth.
People will say mean things to you at the very least.
Assuming the English alphabet, A is the first letter.
So right. And look everybody agrees with you.
Do you always frame your assertions as questions?
The social target, you get used to it.
Yes.
But to elaborate my point.
The path of conformity and the path of reason are utterly different things. Therefore they lead to utterly different ends. Therefore if you find yourself in agreement with everybody then in all probability you have arrived at that other end and you didn’t get there via reason.
(Ok so I said it twice now.)
But independent thinking contradicts my 1000000 years of genetically programmed tribal instinct. You’re asking a lot.
Ok, so given that memory is error prone, value makes more sense than reference, because errors of reference would be more errory.
That makes assumptions about how the referred-to stuff is arranged. It assumes no organization. That memories about lunch would be kept right next to the Chemistry lessons.
So, to step away from that assumption, maybe memory-components are more organized. Gradients of meaning, say.
And maybe memory-components are less chunky. Instead of a memory of lunch, it’s memory of sandwich, table and chewing, arranged appropriately in the referencing data.