Andrew Levine
Nov 2, 2016 · 2 min read

This is hilarious. The odds that a 30 year old memory hasn’t changed is highly unlikely. “New research released this week has found that even people with phenomenal memory are susceptible to having “false memories,” suggesting that “memory distortions are basic and widespread in humans, and it may be unlikely that anyone is immune,” according to the authors of the study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).” In psychiatry it’s called “confabulation”: Confabulation (verb: confabulate) is a disturbance of memory, defined as the production of fabricated, distorted or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world, without the conscious intention to deceive.[1] Individuals who confabulate present incorrect memories ranging from “subtle alterations to bizarre fabrications”,[2] and are generally very confident about their recollections, despite contradictory evidence.[3]

Not only that but, “Daniela Schiller, of Mt. Sinai School of Medicine and her former colleagues from New York University give us a new insight into the nature of memory… Not only are our memories faulty (anyone who has uncovered old diaries knows that), but more importantly Schiller says our memories change each time they are recalled. What we recall is only a facsimile of things gone by.

The fact that you are confident in your memory couldn’t be a more meaningless metric. The fact that you recalled the memory numerous times proves the exact opposite point: it’s LESS likely to be authentic. It could have been someone who looked like Thiel or was friends with Thiel, or it could have been a conversation that you misinterpreted but your ideology twisted into what you wanted it to be. There are plenty of explanations for why your 30 year old memory (and in fact all of our 30 year old memories) should not be trusted. But there are precious few good explanations for why you would bring one up aside from attempting to slander someone.

Given your claim that Thiel made his beliefs widely known (hard to imagine how that would conform to libertarian ideals being that it is a government enforced policy) I wonder how your cognitive dissonance is dealing with the fact that no one else is substantiating your claim. Presumably a massive cover up. I also like how your own admission that this is something Thiel would admit to is somehow twisted in your mind into supporting your claim as opposed to the more reasonable conclusion that if this is something Thiel would admit to (he doesn’t seem like someone who isn’t especially concerned with how others perceive him) then perhaps the fact that he didn’t admit to it is proof either that he did not say it, or that he certainly doesn’t feel the same way any more and the idea that someone should be judged by a belief they supposedly held 30 years ago, recounted by a single person, is comically absurd.

    Andrew Levine

    Written by

    Head of Communications, Steemit Inc.