would you go through with the procedure?

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by Garion

It's one thing to erase the memory in an individual....but...

What about their friends and relatives that know what happened to them?

Do they walk around on eggshells trying not to let slip any details of the event that was erased?

Do they erase from the patients memory the ..erm.. memory that they had a procedure that removed a memory?

What if the patient comes across a picture of the themselves linked to a report of the traumatic event in a newspaper or other media?

I voted no, because the human brain is very adaptive and removing the memory does not stop the patient using reason to work out what happened.

Cheers

Gary

If it is something extremely seriously like rape or worse, the experience SB related, I'll argue it will still probably be worth it to remove the memory.

To avoid problems, the patient will probably have be told what he had chosen to forget soon after the operation. But knowing you were raped on an intellectual level, while unpleasant, beats having visceral memories of it to high heaven.

It'll be even more useful for soldiers. For example, Soldier A might have killed 4 enemies, a "glorious victory". If only he can forget the visceral parts of the experience. So we cut it out and tell him in a battle, he killed four enemies. Without the visceral memories, he can enjoy being a hero, to the benefit of both his country and himself.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

I'll argue that if it is something extremely seriously like rape or worse, the experience SB related, I'll argue it will still probably be worth it to remove the memory.

To avoid problems, the patient will probably have be told what he had chosen to forget soon after the operation. But knowing you were raped on an intellectual level, while unpleasant, beats having visceral memories of it to high heaven.

It'll be even more useful for soldiers. For example, Soldier A might have killed 4 enemies, a "glorious victory". If only he can forget the visceral parts of the experience. So we cut it out and tell him in a battle, he killed four enemies. Without the visceral memories, he can enjoy being a hero, to the benefit of both his country and himself.

The only downside I can see to that is that the soldier might not like the idea of having killed four people he didn't even know, whether he actually remembers it or not.

But you're right overall, and advancing science is usually a good thing. The question, though, was "would you have it done?" Personally, I don't think so. If somebody else wants it, I support it fully, as long as remains the subject's choice, and not someone else's. That's a whole different can of worms.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The only downside I can see to that is that the soldier might not like the idea of having killed four people he didn't even know, whether he actually remembers it or not.

But you're right overall, and advancing science is usually a good thing. The question, though, was "would you have it done?" Personally, I don't think so. If somebody else wants it, I support it fully, as long as remains the subject's choice, and not someone else's. That's a whole different can of worms.

I don't want it done to myself either, although I reserve another's right to have it done as you have said. What concerns me is the can of worms itself. It could become very attractive to alter the minds of people deemed 'problematic' by society, and I think that is scary stuff.

There is an alternative method which doesn't involve any medical proceedure.
Entering politics is a very good method for aquiring selective memory loss.