Reading: Boyer, Pascal. "Evolutionary economics of mental time travel?". Trends in Cognitive Sciences Vol. 12, No. 6 (2008): 219-224. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6382/ab4973

Suddendorf, Thomas and Janie Busby. "Making decisions with the future in mind: Developmental and comparative identification of mental time travel". Learning and Motivation Vol. 36 (2005): 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2005.02.010

 

In the fourth meeting, the above readings were presented by Inbar Pincu.

The first article, by Boyer, offered an explanation as to why people experience "Mental Time Travel" – that is, picturing oneself in a future scenario. Boyer explains it by linking decision-making mechanisms and their dependence on one's emotions, with Mental Time Travel being a tool that negates short-term gains for long-terms gains.

It also suggests that Mental Time Travel might be the origin of human morals.

According to Boyer, since human decision-making depends on one's emotions, Mental Time Travel is a mechanism that is a brake on impulsiveness. As people tend to exaggerate their estimation of the extent of negative emotions they would experience in the future (if the negative outcome would come to pass), Mental Time Travel can create a strong emotional impact from imaginary events that did not happen. As such, it provides one with negative rewards if they attempt to make a decision that would benefit them in the short run; it negatively rewards opportunistic motivation, thereby operating as a commitment device against temptation that may lead a person astray from their own long-term goals.

Mental Time Travel allows human emotions to be considered and experienced for the future event as if this event is taking place in the present, affecting a person's decision-making process and keeping it from aiming only at short-term gains.

We questioned how far into the future one's thoughts need to wander, in order for it to be considered Mental Time Travel. Minutes? Hours? Days? Years?

If two animals are in a stand-off, do the opposing parties not also have a sense of the different possible outcomes of the encounter – for which they can choose to either engage or run away? Is intimidation not a form of foreshadowing a conflict that has yet to pass?

The second article, by Suddendorf and Busby, tried to identify future-oriented behaviour in children by looking into their use of language. The methodology of the first experiment was asking several groups of children of varying ages (between 3 years old and 5 years old) about their personal experiences – what they did yesterday and what they are planning to do in the future. The results, in general, were that the children rarely knew how to answer. The truthfulness of their answers was assessed by their parents.

The researchers also tried a different approach; in the second experiment, children were moved between two rooms – one empty, the other with toys. In the empty room, there was a frame fit for puzzle pieces. In the second room, there were several objects (toys), with puzzle pieces among them. Then, the children were asked which toy they would like to take from the second room back to the empty room. Picking the puzzle pieces was meant to demonstrate the children were able to identify they would be without many options to entertain themselves in the first room, other than the puzzle.

The group discussed several problems with the methodology of the research in both of the experiments, such as giving different parents the same credence in assessing the truthfulness of their children's answers; children's inability to communicate properly not necessarily pointing out to a lack of foresight. In the second experiment, it was the possible bias children could have in picking one toy from the suggested options in the experiment (puzzle pieces and "a few crayons" can create a bias, as they are not a singular option, but a few items, in comparison for the rest of the options).

One of the participants offered insights on time perception in children; that children have a more fluid time perception, compared to adults, and they live in the present.  They can also mix things up when they start talking.

The issue of language itself came into question – that the language used in the research can affect the results, due to different usage of tenses in different languages.

The group shared their earliest memories between them, and tried to estimate their own age from said memories. Most went no further than 3 years of age, and some were unsure as to how they remembered the event. It was suggested that there is a difference between recollection of memories, and recollection of the recollection of memories; with the second option more prone to gradually distort the original memory over time. The possibility of the creation of false memories was mentioned.

The discussion moved back to Boyer's article, and what one would benefit from Mental Time Travel. One group member shared that they have been writing journals for the past 25 years, and kept all of them. Another member said they are using a five-years journal, which has one page for each day, for five years. This allows them to go back to the same date of past years, and compare the past events to the current events. Sometimes, the member said, they even find that they did the very same things, one year apart.

The group member who owns an impressive journal collection shared that they sometimes go through their journals, and it allows them to have a greater perspective on their own life. It reminds them of friends they haven't kept in touch with, places they've been to, the good times and the bad times. The group members shared their conduct regarding keeping a journal – what they choose to write, when and for how long.

We than discussed journals in a different capacity, as they can be seen as important historical relics and documents. Who knows who would read one's journal after they are no longer here? The group was introduced to The German Archive for Diaries, a national archive for the journals of everyday Germans alongside prominent, famous German figures. The group members agreed that they sometimes do write their journals with the future in mind – with either their future-self in mind, or a stranger, which they are making clarifications for as they write. One of the participants said that journal-keeping allows them to explain and rationalize what happened in their past; and Mental Time Travel to the future can explain our purpose and existence to ourselves.

The group discussed their different types of memory-orientation. Do they remember places? Events? Conversations? Physical sensations? Are their memories sight oriented, or tilting towards their sense of smell? The answers were diverse and enlightening.

In the discussion regarding memories and recollection, one participant claimed they are rather happy for their ability to forget. They said that perfect recollection sounds incredibly intimidating ability to have; since it could hinder one's ability to forgive a grievance done to them. There are also events or sights people would rather forget than remember. There are a few people recorded in present days that have the ability of perfect recollection (without being savants). It was said that human brains are only equipped to deal with so much, in a world saturated with information; perhaps, then, memories start around the same time since children's brains are yet to prioritize what is worth keeping and what can be afforded to be done away with.

The group also discussed (briefly) the issues of the Time Travel Fix-it Trope; "The Time Machine" by H. G. Wells; Queen Victoria's Journals; and The Bible, prophets, and specifically Joseph and his capacity to use his dreams to build a better future for a nation.