Robert J. Bradbury wrote:
> > While it is true that the brain is still developing during childhood
> > I think the assumption the childhood 'programming' is therefore hard
> > to overcome is probably wrong.
> I didn't say "hard to overcome", I said "lost".
Sorry, my mistake, I originally wrote 'is forever' but the sentence got changed around in the second parse and it became 'is therefore hard to overcome'.
> I believe the relative difficulty in overcoming it is strongly related to
> the strength of the threat to survival that was present when the formation
> of the memories or beliefs occured. If your father said, "If you don't go
> to church, I'm going to tan your hide...", then the programming may be
> pretty strong.
You might put it to memory and you might act on that memory but I doubt it would change your mentality.
> My *suspicion* would be that circulating Adrenalin functions as a strong
> amplifier of memory strengths.
It's likely, it makes sense that memories of emotional situations should have greater 'strength' although I have no personal experience of this happening. However, just because it is etched into my memory does not mean it will change my mentality. I might be the sort of person who will avoid a tanned hide at all costs in which case my fathers threats would work because they would change my behaviour (as above), but if I do not have that mentality my fathers threats would never give me that mentality (or alter my programming as I think you were suggesting).
> It has been my direct observation (personal experience) in multiple
> situations that strongly entrenched early memories that are mostly
> suppresed (though perhaps acted upon), may be "overcome", if you can bring
> the memory to the surface so that the conscious mind is aware of it.
Yes, this fits my own thinking as above. I would not be able to reverse my programming simply because I located the event that caused it, however, if I find the subconscious memory I am acting upon I can change my behaviour.