|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 03 2012 @ 06:49 PM EDT |
Too true! There is one semi-official history of an event which I do
not
recognize. I happened to be caught up as an accidental passerby and what I
saw
is not what some versions report.
Agree there. When I see
something in the press that I actually have a lot of background knowledge of and
I see the over-simplifications, spin and bias towards a particular viewpoint
then it makes me wonder about the other articles where I am not familiar with
the background. Perhaps I cannot exclude my biases, but it is a little alarming
that I might not be aware of the biases of others. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- A very good point - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 04 2012 @ 05:31 AM EDT
|
Authored by: Wol on Saturday, August 04 2012 @ 09:34 AM EDT |
Firstly, I know too much about the SCIENCE of memory to trust eye-witnesses.
Indeed, if I ever ended up in the witness box, I might well end up having a pop
at the lawyers for trying to brainwash me! A lot of cross-examination techniques
seem to be almost perfectly designed - according to scientific principles - for
modifying memory.
But I also have two personal experiences. Long ago, I was at some event. And one
of my friends (who's truthfulness I have no occasion to doubt) described that
event to me. NO WAY was it the event I was at! Yet it was. She was describing it
as she saw it and I couldn't recognise it.
And my wife has Parkinsons. This plays havoc with short term memory. I daren't
trust her recollection of things.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- But evidence - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 04 2012 @ 05:42 PM EDT
- But evidence - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, August 04 2012 @ 07:04 PM EDT
|
|
|
|