Controversy: Special Mechanism Hypothesis
The special-mechanism hypothesis has been the subject of considerable discussion in recent years, with some authors endorsing the hypothesis and others noting potential problems.This hypothesis divides memory processes into different categories, positing that different mechanisms underlie flashbulb memories. Yet many argue that flashbulb memories are simply the product of multiple, unique factors coalescing.
Read more about this topic: Flashbulb Memory
Famous quotes containing the words special, mechanism and/or hypothesis:
“Navarette, a Chinese missionary, agrees with Leibniz and says that “It is the special providence of God that the Chinese did not know what was done in Christendom; for if they did, there would be never a man among them, but would spit in our faces.””
—Matthew Tindal (1653–1733)
“I’ve never known a Philadelphian who wasn’t a downright “character;” possibly a defense mechanism resulting from the dullness of their native habitat.”
—Anita Loos (1888–1981)
“The hypothesis I wish to advance is that ... the language of morality is in ... grave disorder.... What we possess, if this is true, are the fragments of a conceptual scheme, parts of which now lack those contexts from which their significance derived. We possess indeed simulacra of morality, we continue to use many of the key expressions. But we have—very largely if not entirely—lost our comprehension, both theoretical and practical, of morality.”
—Alasdair Chalmers MacIntyre (b. 1929)