http://www.wired.com/magazine/2012/02/ff_forgettingpill/all/1 Long article but worth the read... I am not quite sure how I feel about this development. I think that while for very traumatic experiences it would be nice to be able to have something that will make you forget what you saw, but at the same time I don't think that it should be used since past experiences have the ability to change us for the better. Also, getting into specifics, I would be afraid that the wrong memory would be targeted. I am not sure if it is just me, but whenever I am doing something or recalling a specific event (mostly spoken); I always seem to have a side thought channel going on where I am thinking of something else or where I am going to take a conversation/thought next. My worry is that those same memories will also be targeted since the pill works with what is currently going on in the mind and being processed. So what are your thoughts on this?
Certainly scary stuff, however, I think there are people with memories they would want to erase without question. As the article stated, memories are flimsy things, so perhaps that makes it a little less crazy; this is just selectively triggering the memories in the right ways.
**** that ****. I have memories that no human alive should have, but they made me who I am. I won't trade a part of me for that. What makes us who we are is the struggles that we live through. Our life is defined by overcoming adversity-why then remove the record of the struggle? I know people will mention traumatic experiences but I've been through some of the worst humanity has to offer. I still think this is a poor idea. Life is defined by the struggle. Without it our lives mean nothing.
This ^^ Everyone has bad experiences and suffers trauma to different degrees, I know I have never been through things such as some people, such as Kayin, have, but I would say it is part of what makes us who we are and it should be there to stay. Also we have the second problem which is: If someone has suffered from something so badly that they are in absolutely no doubt they want to remove the memory, then maybe it is worthwhile, but then who is to say what counts as "bad enough". That could be what it takes for one person to come close to wanting to erase a memory, but at the same time there could be a person who has just broken up with a partner in a huge fight or something and thinks that this is bad enough to remove the memory. We can't easily decide what counts as bad enough, and the problem is that if there are no rules about who can use this then people will just use it at will, whenever anything bad happens, and maybe even start relying on it to remove anything bad from their life, which is something that we don't really want happening. If these ever do come into use I think a lot of very strict rules will have to be put in place around their use, but then of course the issues I mentioned about what classes as "bad enough" will come up, making this a very hard problem to work with.
Why would you want to forget, it is important to remember how ever traumatic, my friend at 5 was killed on the road and i witnessed what happened, it made me much more careful, when other children would just cross the roads i wouldn't, and no way would i cross the rail tracks. It taught me a important lesson that life is very fragile and can be taken from you in a moment. I think the mind does protect already to a certain point especially when very young, are we not what our memories make us and don't they have some form of shaping what our personalities become, if we choose to forget i really wonder how that would pan out.
I agree with what people are saying in this thread but I think you're not considering cases such as rape and witnessing horrific scenes (such as the one described in the article) which contribute nothing to psychological development and cause large amount of pain. Even if these memories did in some way contribute to 'bettering' said person, is that really enough of an excuse to not treat them? Looks like some posts are missing.
1. I think it's far too dangerous too mess with the human brain. It could destroy more than it can help, even though the article gives the impression that it works spotless, you shouldn't underestimate the human brain, which is obviously far more complex than the one of those test-animals. 2. Who will it be given to? Can you choose yourself to take one? What memories are "traumatic enough" to be erased? Which ones aren't? 3. Even the worst memories can have a positive impact on the future. They can define who you have become. Even negative erased memory can leave you behind with a hole in your person, your personality. 4. Nobody wants black holes in his memories, I can image the "what happened?!" can drive you nuts. 5. This could be used for very very evil stuff (but then again, nearly every invention can...) Could be very useful for drug treatment, as mentioned in the article, though I'm not certain addiction is caused by the brain alone. Doesn't the rest of the body also rely on the drug in question for functioning properly? A bit off-topic: The whole concept reminds me of To The Moon, lovely game. And also of this
Bad memories help shape up as much as, if not moreso, than good memories. Anyway, on a practical level, say you take a pill to forget something - does everyone else who remembers that incident then have to take the pill? It would make future conversations a bit odd, you could convince anyone of anything and just convince them they took a pill to forget.
I don't think the pill makes you forget --it just reduces the emotional valence of the memory a bit. There are psychological techniques that do that. It can be useful. Keep in mind that we are not talking about just bad memories, but traumatic memories --of which the emotional impact is so severe that it actually disrupts normal functioning on an ongoing basis. If a single tablet can take the edge off enough to allow a person to, well, sleep and function properly on a lasting basis without necessarily impeding recall or associated emotion, and without creating psychological dependence on the tablet, then why not? How is it different from taking a painkiller?
Even trauma is responsible for who we are. This said from a person that patches the wall he sleeps against bi-yearly. Pain shapes us more than joy-it really is the thing that defines us. Even though I still have nightmares, I can't give that away. I even see the benefit for such as PTSD from places like Afghanistan, but doesn't it thereby make the incident less significant (I don't mean as far as psychological disturbance, but as psychosocial significance-if it's less horrific why shouldn't we just go do it again?) The ability for abuse is far more than many other types of drugs-how about rapes the victim can't remember? I see it as a very dangerous thing.
What i find more interesting in that article is the possibility of using PKMzeta as a nootropic they way they describe it it sounds like it would give you an eidetic (sp?) memory recall ability if we could find some way to amplify it's production.
As I said: that tablet (as I understand it) will not erase the memory, nor the feelings associated with them; it will just reduce the intensity. A traumatic event registers on so many levels that it is pretty much impossible to erase it. A rape victim will still remember te ordeal and possibly, it could be argued, be able to make a better testimony in court when less susceptible to breakdown or being intimidated into paralysis by the defence attorney.
why erase my post? you might think that taking prescription drugs is the way to fix people.. but I have the exact opposite opinion.. it might make them look ok but they are scrambled eggs- bertie yankers after that how is that benefiting society if everyone erases what makes them, well them.. this is what I think wrong with a lot of kids nowdays too.. they get told they have these conditions- it's normal.. we always had the crazy kid in class when I was growing up everyone has thier own gifts.. take those away and your left with a toolbag- we need less bertie yankers
Because it included a video of two naked morons jiggling about and fiddling with each other's junk? Surely that's enough of a reason!?
I chundered a little when I saw it. So does anyone here who is advocating the potential use of this method have any memories they would choose to reduce or remove? I have seen some things I would rather not have, but nothing so traumatic that I would choose to remove its impact from my consciousness. Perhaps I have been lucky, but I know there are others on here who have seen and experienced things I couln't even imagine.
I don't want in anyway to sound condescending but there are other people apart from yourself who've experienced traumatic events and I believe there exist cases where the 'victim' of said event would not hesitate to erase their trauma. Not everyone will consider all past events to be part of who they are and many may consider these memories to be foreign intruders which continue to haunt them.
Really Nexxo, are you suggesting that I read the entire article before making a comment? Shocking! Quite right though, I believe in many instances medication is dished out before alternative psychological therapies are exhausted. I particularly think in children, whose brain physiology and morphology is obviously developing and evolving, drugs should be a very, very, last resort.
We have seen what can happen to teenagers (their brains are not fully developed) when put on mind altering drugs, doctors are encouraged to subscribe them as if ithey were candy, I might add. There are repercussions when you tamper with the chemistry in the brain, all human beings are individuals, we all have an individual response, to everything, not just drugs, we're not the Borg. I find it unfortunate that we've allowed for this hive mind mentality to snowball, rather then checking it by stressing our individuality. Edit: As far as this memory suppressant pill goes, as mentioned earlier, our experiences make us who we are.
This is what I thought. People aren't forgetting things, the emotional response to those memories is just being toned down. People will still remember traumatic events, but the crippling fear and other negative emotions associated with that memory will have less of an impact, making them manageable. It doesn't say anything about complete removal of memories.
