Posted on 12/05/2004 7:05:33 AM PST by shrinkermd
A few months ago, as I trudged down the stairs of my office building, deep in my thoughts, I noticed a dark-haired woman waving to me from the window of her car. She looked vaguely familiar, but I couldn't place her. Like quite a few others, she had slipped out of my mental Rolodex. In my brain, the synaptic traces that connected us had frayed. Yet again, I had misplaced an entire human being.
''So wonderful to see you,'' she said, inquiring by name after every member of my family, including the two dogs. Apparently she was not a casual acquaintance. Fending off panic, I proceeded through a mental list: Work? School? Synagogue? I couldn't visualize her in these places. I was about to cut and run with a quick ''nice to see you, too'' when the rear window slid down, revealing a toothy grin.
''We've been to the orthodontist,'' she said. The minute I saw Sam's freckled face, the mystery was solved. Our sons were best pals in nursery school and kindergarten. I had sat in her kitchen, discussing birthday parties. I remembered her backyard dotted with Little Tikes plastic play furniture. I knew what she did for work, and the name of her Portuguese nanny.
''Lisa,'' I said, as if her identity had never eluded me, ''it's terrific to see you
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
"And what precisely did it mean to have an average amount of memory impairment? Although we notice it first in middle age -- sometimes as early as our mid-30's -- memory starts to decline in our 20's. This has been demonstrated with mice, rats, primates and humans, all of whom begin to lose processing speed at about the same relative age. If you're a middle-aged rat, 15 months old, this means that it takes you longer to locate an underwater platform in a water maze. If you're a middle-aged human, it means that when you hear a list of words, you begin to lose some of your ability to ''acquire'' them (place them in short-term memory and parrot them back immediately), ''store'' them (move them -- after 10 seconds -- from short-term memory to long-term memory) and ''retrieve'' them (haul them out of long-term memory). These abilities don't change overnight, but by the time a person reaches her early 40's, there are statistically significant differences from the early-to-mid-20's peak.
I have been tempted to do a "vanity" on ageing and the Supreme Court. Part of our problem with the Court is they have fewer and fewer contacts with the real world and cannot remember what it was like. Surely, 25 years in office or retirement at 72 woul not eliminate good candidates from office.
I'm not in a position to make decisions about the age of the Supreme Court...but I've recently started to take some intensive training for work, and it's amazing how much easier it seems for the younger members of my class to retain new information.
I've started doing crosswords again recently - I read this is a useful memory exercise for those of us over 40 :)
Ouch. Now let me see, what was I planning to post about this article?
I tend to agree. Keeps the edge on.
If the woman had a big rack, I would have remembered her.
Yes, that is true; however, the big problem for everyone is that we may know or recognize up to 2500 people, but we, at most, interact in a meaningful way with no more than 20. Research has supported this and the thought is that we evolved or survived in small groups of less than 20.
In any case, this means SCOTUS members are increasingly reflectors of those small number of elites they interact with and nothing else. If one assumes government is society than, perhaps, is what we should expect with cognitive elites. If one sees the culture from a majoritarian perspective as something beyond, and many ways superior to, government, then this isolation is dangerous and doomed to long term failure. I for one see the culture or American civilization as being a greater force in daily life than the judicial elites who consistently try to abort or change it because of their almost missionary religious zeal to improve it.
Your point about the "law clerks" is proof positive the SCOTUS members need something else to influence them except bright law clerks. Indeed, scary as it seems now SCOTUS is talking about using international law as precedent--never mind our Constitution.
I was gonna post something but, now, I've forgotten what it was.
Thank you for this article! I was beginning to think I was having too many incidents of 'sometimers' disease! Someone needs to tell a person BEFORE they hit 40 that their entire body is going to start falling apart when they hit 40....
I had that same experience.
But it turned out the woman had just been digging around in my garbage, trying to engage in identity theft.
< |:)~
Took the paper to the trash can and returned to install the batteries.
Had to go back to the trash can to retrieve the new batteries to finish the original chore.
Sure is good that this site remembers my password!
May I still be allowed to post? ;^)
Very interesting.
I call that Halfheimers because I'm not quite, not quite, old enough for Alzheimers.
I do the daily Cryptoquote as a self-test.
Just what we need, a roadmap to unctuousness.
"a roadmap to unctuousness."
I had to look that one up. And I still can't pronounce it,
However, the benefits of Omega-3 oil can obtained far short of greasy skin. The point is that it also smooths and makes the skin supple, more like it was when it was young, but from the inside.
Space aliens
Good one. I call it CRS - Can't Remember S#!+...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.