Perceptsion can be very fickle . . . influenced by a variety of things besides the photons, soundwaves and pressures against the skin or mollecules in the nose.
Memory is even more fickle.
—Memory is influenced by past experience;
—Perceptual sets
—Emotional states
—Reference group’s stated perceptions and biases and in many case just folks who are nearby—their stated perceptions and biases.
—events just after the event being ‘remembered.’
etc. etc. etc.
All of that is why witness testimony is so often flawed and why 10 folks seeing the same accident from nearly the same perspective can sound like they were viewing 10 different accidents.
And that doesn’t even get into dreams, visions
and now . . .
technologies which project into the brain’s synapses via various wavelengths . . .
visual images, sounds, smells, conversations, scenes, events . . .
which never happened but will then be thought of by the victim as part of the history of their life experience.
The above is not tinfoil hat stuff. It is quite real.
The visions and dreams of Daniel and Ezekiel were . . . ‘downloads’ from God of future events in symbolic form and often enough in literal form—registering on the brains of the prophets as though they were seeing them more or less in front of their faces in real time on the terra firma of the Middle East.
By definition they were truth because they came from God-of-the-angel-armies—beyond-time even though they had not yet happened.
Prayers for your computer system. Still am interested in the Maitreya ping from another thread when it’s workable for you to get around to it.
Turn this statement around, dear brother in Christ, and I would agree with it.
What Hume is saying is that memories are primary resources of the mind to which human reasoning and intelligence can be brought to bear "in the next step," i.e., in cognition.
In the description you give, it seems some "more present" or near-past experience is influencing the past memory and the way in which it is being interpreted. The latter seems true enough. But whatever the interpretation, it depends on the memory; the memory itself doesn't change; though one's understanding of it may change over time.
But we ought not to miss Hume's basic point: For Hume, a memory is a primary datum of the mind acquired by means of perception and experience, however flawed they may be.
Indeed, Eric Voegelin thought memory -- especially those memories going back to earliest childhood -- so form our later sense of Truth of the world that we ought to engage in active recovery and meditation of them. He called this process anamnesis.... He wrote a book about it, by that name.
Dear brother, I'll get to that Maitreya business when I have my own machine back. I'm using a borrowed system, and can't depend on having continuous access to it so to keep up a conversation on that topic, or any other really. It's been catch-as-catch-can for me all this past week. Sigh....
Thank you so very much for writing and kind wishes!