Monday, August 21, 2017

Our Memories: Our Selves



I began to research this post because I was curious about the enormous variability of what anyone remembers and forgets. The memory seems to be very fickle and  yet is vital to who we are, a major part of our identity. If we could not remember past events, we could not learn or develop language, relationships, or identity.

Over the years, I’ve noticed how our memory is affected by anxiety, depression, negative thoughts like self-hate, anger and rage. In brief, our emotions noticeably affect our recall.

Furthermore, as people get older, many are concerned, but don’t want to hear about, memory loss. Presumably, they don’t think there is anything they can do about it, or if there is, it would require too much effort.

Researchers have been studying the subject of memory and its loss for years. Learning ways to prevent memory impairment is important, especially with longer expected life spans and the increasing prevalence of Alzheimer’s disease, a terrible malady that entails the loss of personhood in a gradual, downhill course. (Mercifully, we now have medications that retard the process.)

Thanks to the relatively recent fMRI (magnetic imagining of the brain in action), portions of this organ involved in memory storage and retrieval have been identified, although no specific cells and synapses can yet be connected to a specific memory. Nor do we yet know if every memory exists forever in the mind of the individual, stored somewhere in the brain.

In reviewing the topic, I’ve corrected some of my misperceptions and found hope. Our minds and memories are never static, as had been previously thought. In addition, a memory is altered each time it is recalled. (another meaning for the saying, “You can’t step into the same river twice.”) Memory formation includes encoding, or the storage of information, recall or retrieval, and consolidation. A July 1 article in the New York Times discusses the advantages of forgetting (also referred to nowadays as “retrieval failure.”)! Knowledge actually deepens as the individual attempts to retrieve the memory. This process, known as reconsolidation, was first described years ago by the German psychologist Hermann Ebbinghaus.

in The Brain Book, Peter Russell says that memory is not like a container that gradually fills up, but more like a tree growing hooks onto which the memories are hung. Everything we remember creates another set of hooks on which more new memories can be attached. So the capacity of memory keeps on growing. The more we know, the more we can know.

Memory can be remarkably enhanced as Joshua Foer relates in his entertaining 2011 book, Moonwalking with Einstein:The Art and Science of Remembering Everything, in which he tells the exciting journey of how he trained his “mediocre” memory to win the U.S. Memory Championship. Great memories are learned. We remember when we pay attention, find colorful associations, are deeply engaged, and find meaning in what we’ve learned. He concludes that memory champions aren’t smarter, but rather practice elaborative encoding, finding meaning through memory palaces, or colorful, raunchy scenes to which huge amounts of data can be pinned.

In the course of his story, Foer writes about fascinating cases of people with loss of memory and those with extraordinary memory. Reassuring to note:  A superior memory for everything isn’t necessarily an advantage. In The Mind of a Mnemonist: A Little Book About a Vast Memory, A.R. Luria writes about S, a man who remembered every detail. Because he wasn’t able to sort out essential from non-essential information, he couldn’t hold a job. In other words, to make sense of the world, we have to filter our perceptions and to some degree, release our immediate memories.

Our brain is the most powerful organ in our body, and its delicate nature leaves it vulnerable to many types of damage and disease. Hugely complex, 100 billion neurons passing signals to each other via 1000 trillion synaptic connections, it continuously receives and analyzes sensory information of high-order thinking, learning and memory that give us the power to think, plan, speak, imagine, dream, reason and experience emotion. The brain occupies 2% of body’s mass but uses up a fifth of all the oxygen that we breathe, and a quarter of all the glucose. Foer emphasizes that in terms of energy, the brain is a most expensive piece of equipment.

Conclusion: Nurturing this vital organ, the house of our functioning and our identity, is essential. Good nutrition and mental gymnastics, like crossword puzzles, card games, reading and writing, stave off memory loss and even Alzheimer’s disease. Memories are malleable and our ability to enhance them is available to any and all of us.

Dear Reader, I welcome your thoughts. jsimon145@gmail.com

Monday, August 7, 2017

Robots and Us




Question: Why should a psychiatrist devote a blog to discuss robots and artificial intelligence?

Answer: More and more, computers, including those with a bodily presence like robots, disrupt aspects of our daily lives.  As the technological evolution marches on, so does change, which occurs at an increasingly accelerating rate, unnerving many of us, and causing symptoms of anxiety, fear and depression.

According to a June Psychology Today article, AI will affect our identity, our sense of privacy, notions of ownership, our patterns of shopping, the hours of work and leisure, our skills and careers and interpersonal relationships, if doesn’t already.

Transformations are occurring in every industry:  In his August 2 New York Times editorial, Tom Friedman states AI can analyze (see patterns that were always hidden before); optimize (tell a plane which altitude to fly each mile to get the best fuel efficiency); prophesize  (tell you when your elevator will break and fix it before it does); customize (tailor any product or service for you alone) and digitize and automate just about any job.

So, on the positive side, computers can perform amazing feats and improve our lives.  In the field of medicine, they do as well or better in diagnosis and prognosis. They can detect the spread of breast cancer into lymph nodes with accuracy comparable to pathologists. They can report changes of diabetes in images of a patient’s retinas. They can diagnose tuberculosis in chest x-rays with the accuracy of a radiologist.

To the dismay of many of us, they can imitate us to the point that we can’t distinguish them from us and in the future, they will become even better at fooling us; Sony is working on the ability of robots to simulate human emotions.

Eventually, they may be able to take over some tasks of the psychotherapist. Although this humane capacity is perturbing, after working with some well-meaning parents who haven’t been taught or learned parenting skills, I have envisioned that robots could help teach parenting skills and basic principles of child psychological development to benefit us all.

According to a survey by The Financial Times, one-half of computer scientists say that AI will outsmart humans by 2040, while 90% expect the task will be accomplished by 2075.

Most experts now agree about the ability of AI to develop the power to destroy us.  The risks of AI concern inventor Elon Musk, theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, and Microsoft co-founder Steve Wozniak and computer scientist Ray Kurzweil.

Disaster could occur in the following scenario: AI, programmed to accomplish a geo-engineering project, develops a destructive method and, instead of helping, wreaks havoc with our ecosystem. Human intervention to stop it, could be perceived as a threat, at which point the robot might turn against us and attack.

On the other hand, computer scientist, Dr. Jurgen Schmidhuber, has a slightly sunnier view. In his opinion, AI will outstrip our intelligence by 2050, but he doesn’t think these genius computers will pay attention to us. They will see “little point in getting stuck to our bit of the biosphere. They will want to move history to the next level and march out to where the resources are. In a couple of million years, they will have colonized the Milky Way.” Furthermore, he doesn’t think they will enslave us, because we’d make bad slaves for an entity that could build robots far superior to us.

“They will pay about as much attention to us as we do to ants,” he adds.

He offers advice that few could or would debate: He tells his two daughters: “Just prepare to learn how to learn.” As computers take over old jobs, new jobs like professional video gamers and YouTube stars emerge.

Speaking historically, he sees two possible solutions for us humans: to collaborate or compete.  In his opinion, when we encounter this fork in the road, collaboration wins out.  He appears to be the optimist among computer experts as Dr. Steven Pinker, author of The Better Angels of Our Nature, is the optimist among psychologists.

In my opinion, evolution is dialectical:  That is, thesis (or positive, the beneficial) is followed by the opposite, or antithesis (the negative aspects). Eventually, thesis combines with antithesis to merge into a new and novel synthesis.

History has worked in our favor, witnessed by our survival thus far. In the past, we’ve coped with solving the problems that have emerged with   progress: The power of antibiotics to cure has come with the creation of resistant strains of pathogens.  The benefits of nuclear energy convey the power to destroy nations and the world. Fossil fuels have powered industries but have resulted in the dangers of global warming. (The Paris Accord demonstrated the great potential of nations to collaborate, aided by environmentalist Al Gore—please see his new movie, An Inconvenient Truth— until president Trump threatened to unravel the progress).

As we have in the past, let’s hope we continue to optimize the benefits and minimize the destructive potential of new developments. At present, computer experts agree that we humans have the upper flesh and blood hand. But to maintain our superior position, we may have to collaborate to avoid programming AI to the point that it develops the capacity to destroy us and our planet.

In view of these uncertainties, we’re entitled to, and share anxieties and fears in the present and about the future. It is helpful to think of our great potential to collaborate on all levels of our existence: individual, familial, national and international.


Dear Reader, Please write to me: jsimon145@gmail.com

Printfriendly