Comments on: We are what we remember. Or are we?

By: chutney

chutney — Fri, 14 Feb 2003 21:24:59 +0000

Talk of “behavior” and “history” is a little too deterministic for my taste, but I catch your point. I don’t see any reason to make memory the only definer of self; it’s probably just one among a handful. And habit seems another good candidate.

If we characterized “history” as the chosen narrowing of our own options (for good and for ill), then I’d go for that. But I think we can usually make choices contrary to our habits, history, and memories, so I can’t see any of them playing the trump card. I think they’re probably all in a constant game of ‘king of the mountain’ with each other.

By: Charly Z

Charly Z — Fri, 14 Feb 2003 20:44:43 +0000

"We are what we remember...?" Good question. As you mention, memory is a tricky, subjective thing. However, habit or —more to the point— behavior isn't. Behavior is built through a lengthy process of action and response: conditioning. Perhaps we might also call it "history." A person may not keep memory of the events that gave shape to their behavior; still, that doesn't mean that those events in their history didn't happen.

Maybe we aren't our memories, since they are not reliable; perhaps they only give us our character or persona. I think it's more reliable to say "We are how we behave."

Now to what brought on this diatribe: the observations made in Memento about memory. How does that fit into all this? Now I'm not sure...

By: CP

CP — Fri, 14 Feb 2003 04:14:06 +0000

The linked piece helped me. Thanks.