Ways of storing information

[Kyriakos]

Maybe @Hrothbern will know of this.

I was wondering if there are any books of note on the (theories regarding the) differences in storing information in the mind, regarding the relative lack of emotional attachment to information. For example, if you are traumatized, the memory/info is obviously fused with strong emotion, but if you are learning how to prove the pythagorean theorem then (chances are that) it is stored in a detached manner, emotion-wise.
Another type of storing info is more in flux; eg when imagining a plot of a story, or trying to solve a math problem, you are moving from point to point without set ties to any point. Moreover, intuition can be a part of even supposedly just logic-based problems (eg mathematicians intutively sensing an answer, but not being able to prove it fully, something rather common in that field).

Being able to store info with no pronounced emotional attachment is crucial, of course. Such info seems to be more stable, and easier to access and use as a basis for examining subjects tied to it. Yet it also appears to be a type of information storing which is quite level by itself, and not linked particularly to a progression. In a way it is the opposite of a syllogism/series calculation/extrapolation, in that it is a set point, and a bit like a book on a shelf; not meant to be a breakthrough by itself, but always more accessible in case it is needed.

 

[Hehehe]

I'm not a neuroscientist, and as such, I can't claim to be an expert on the human brain. But with that caveat out of the way, here's my take on it:

There are no "different ways" of storing information. Memories in the brain are nothing more than connections between neurons, and the strength of these connections depends on two things: how important it is perceived to be, and how often that connection is used. If there's a piece of information you need often, you're much more likely to remember it. Psychological trauma is not only a result of a strong emotional experience, but people often relive it in their memories, reinforcing it. So I'm not entirely sure what you mean by these "ways of storing information". Are you suggesting that there's a separate memory just for facts? Let me ask you this: how easy is it to memorize things that you find boring (things that you have no emotional attachment to?)

 

[Kyriakos]

I'm not a neuroscientist, and as such, I can't claim to be an expert on the human brain. But with that caveat out of the way, here's my take on it:

There are no "different ways" of storing information. Memories in the brain are nothing more than connections between neurons, and the strength of these connections depends on two things: how important it is perceived to be, and how often that connection is used. If there's a piece of information you need often, you're much more likely to remember it. Psychological trauma is not only a result of a strong emotional experience, but people often relive it in their memories, reinforcing it. So I'm not entirely sure what you mean by these "ways of storing information". Are you suggesting that there's a separate memory just for facts? Let me ask you this: how easy is it to memorize things that you find boring (things that you have no emotional attachment to?)

I am alluding to the storing of info in a less emotional manner (eg when you study for a test, albeit that is ussually short-term stored, or in the example i gave of when you learn a math proof) compared to info stored in a state of greater flux or with emotional load as well. The latter isn't only about trauma, or other strong emotional link, but can be also similar to what is used in art: a writer potentially feels emotions about words.
I think - going from self-reflection- that the types are highly distinct, at least on some level*. Another example:
-when i speak of stuff which are set (eg biographical info on Plato, in my lectures) the info is not tied to emotion that much, and is more sensed as factual or dry. When i speak of some assumption, the progression is of a different quality, and more flexible/in flux and can be leading to a more emotional identification of the various objects i am dealing with.

*on other levels they may not differ that much. Afterall it is an issue just what the difference is between emotion and thought. That said, some kinds of thoughts are obviously sensed as more soaked in emotion, than other ones.

 

[Hrothbern]

I will add some more later
need some time to word what I want to answer properly.

But for now:
I understand that you talk about "cold facts" like a highly secure and abstract one as 16 squared is 256, or less abstract but still secure like my daughter was born in 1991, or less abstract and less secure as Plato was born around 428 BC.

 

[Kyriakos]

I will add some more later
need some time to word what I want to answer properly.

But for now:
I understand that you talk about "cold facts" like a highly secure and abstract one as 16 squared is 256, or less abstract but still secure like my daughter was born in 1991, or less abstract and less secure as Plato was born around 428 BC.

Yes, although the crucial aspect isn't how factual something is, but how it happens to be (under normal - but not all - circumstances) stored in a dry way, ie apparently without much emotion tied to it. In other words, the actual type of info isn't the only aspect, and at times isn't the critical aspect as to how it will be stored.
Eg i see no reason why it wouldn't be - for some people, anyway - relatively common to store in such a way info like "X will meet me at Y place" etc, even if partly it would be hypothetical.
Basically the defining difference is that such memory/info stored serves far more easily as a dry stepping stone, while emotional-heavy info seems to be far more volatile and (often non-consciously) tied to deeper strata of the mind. Again, not due to the type of info, but due to how it was stored.
It is also likely that any type of storing can morph to its (apparent) antithesis. Eg some dry info can be at times picked up as emotional-heavy. An example of that would be someone who used to identify integers (eg 1) as a dry info, but then questions what it means to identify 1 as something. Again, the potential for volatile status doesn't have to tie logically to the nominal type of info stored.
Another example of the above, a more dramatic one: usually one doesn't think of the info about when they were born as info which is volatile/non stable/has other meaning. But a mental patient can even attach symbolic significance to it (eg view it as part of a riddle, etc). Then the dry info will become very emotionally charged.