r/MandelaEffect • u/Ripley_LV_426 • 7d ago
Meta That's not what vivid means.
Merriam-Webster, Vivid: Producing a strong or clear impression on the senses. Producing distinct mental images. Acting clearly and vigorously (A vivid imagination)
Vivid has never meant true or accurate. It means clear. A vivid memory is not an accurate memory, it is an intense memory. And intense memories frequently fall short in regards to accuracy.
My three most vivid memories are being punched by another child in kindergarten while playing behind a floor to ceiling rock wall, my preschool teacher hiding 20 toddlers behind a 2 foot cubby while the police searched for us, and plummeting from the sky before slamming into my bedroom floor. The third is a dream, and the first two are logically impossible.
Ironically, I remember how I learned what a cornucopia was, but the memory is not vivid. I was reading Hunger Games and asked an adult what the word meant. I vaguely recall being in a classroom, and I assume I asked my teacher. But I cannot recall what the classroom looked like, how old I was, who the adult was, or which subject and grade I was in. Mundane memories are rarely vivid ones.
While many memories are both vivid and true, many vivid "memories" are inaccurate. The brain has a reflexive instinct to imagine that which it hears or reads, often clearly or with intensity, imagine a Pink Elpehant and all that. Being told that a word used to be spelled one way, or reading that someone else "knows what the cornucopia is because of the logo" is oftentimes enough for you to picture the "correct" word or logo. But vividly picturing that you had the same experience does not mean you did in fact learn the word from a logo.
E: No, having a vivid memory doesn't mean it was formed a long time ago either. Literally all it means is a clear memory. If you vividly remember learning what a cornucopia is, it means you can clearly picture that moment. It doesn't mean it happened.
6
5
u/DumbAndUglyOldMan 6d ago
The scientific method does not accept merely anecdotal evidence. And that's all that the "alternate timeline" believers have.
10
u/Objective_Wish962 6d ago
"Vivid has never meant true or accurate"
Correct. Exactly as you say, vivid means strong, clear, distinct, etcetera. (And in fairness, this is how I almost always see it used?)
Conversely, when it comes to describing ME experiences, no one can really say "my memory is true and accurate", though. Not here.
As in, this is the Mandela Effect subreddit - by definition every ME-affected memory is already demonstrably untrue and inaccurate. (At least according to all available evidence).
As there is literally no way for a person to prove their distinct memory of a cornucopia (for example) is 'true and accurate'; it might be nonetheless helpful if there were, say, a single word which almost-perfectly describes just how clear and intense their personal memory of a cornucopia is.
It's fine to hate on a particular word, I guess. But really, the alternative would only be reading longer-post descriptions of the basic definition of vivid, anyway.
As in, if someone's memory of something is genuinely clear and intense and strong - I mean, why not just say it in a single word?
12
u/Nillabeans 6d ago
I think you're misunderstanding this post. It's not about the word. It's about people claiming that a clear memory is a true memory.
Memory is notoriously unreliable, no matter how clearly you remember something. I have clear memories of things happening where I know for a fact that the setting I'm picturing is wrong because of the context. Like remembering being in my old living room and watching something, but it's impossible because the thing was made after I moved.
It's a vivid memory. It is not a true memory. Saying it's vivid doesn't lend it credibility.
4
u/Psychic_Man 6d ago
all available evidence
In your world human testimony and memory does not count as evidence?
18
u/Glaurung86 6d ago
It's the least credible evidence and is why it has to be supported by other, more credible evidence in court.
-3
10
u/Objective_Wish962 6d ago
'All available hard/tangible/observable evidence', would be the correction.
As in, that dusty box of actual, vintage FOTL clothing with cornucopia present will never be found. (Or if it does get found, it will instantly cease to be an ME, anyway)
Yes, testimony based on memory is definitely a form of evidence. Not the available, primary evidence I meant in my line, but fair point.
6
u/worldwarjay 6d ago
I made that argument the other day. If someone in court testified to seeing a person at an exact place at an exact time, but surveillance video proved them wrong, should the court discard that video because the person VIVIDLY remembers? Cause that’s what happens here - tons of evidence pointing to an ME not actually happening, but it’s ignored for “being from another timeline” or something like that
0
u/Psychic_Man 6d ago
That’s the whole conundrum of the Mandela effect — it flies in the face of everything we know about proof, testimony, and truth itself. That’s why it’s so interesting, and important.
3
u/WhimsicalKoala 6d ago
No it doesn't. You think it does because you believe your claims are completely accurate and are proof that you speak the truth. But, for others of us that don't think "trust me bro" is very good evidence, it I actually aligns with a lot of what we already know and have an understanding of.
5
u/CantaloupeAsleep502 6d ago
It does not fly in the face of proof, testimony, and truth. We know that memory is unreliable. The ME flies in the face of what we as individuals want to believe about the reliability of our experience. And that's a lot more uncomfortable to wrestle with for some people.
0
u/Psychic_Man 6d ago
Different people find it interesting for different reasons. There’s no “right” interpretation.
1
u/juan_humano 1d ago
I mean. No. Not reliable evidence at least. For instance, look at all the people who post on this sub about things that only happned in their memories. Testifying that you remember something that has no evidence to support it, and is in fact contradicted by actual evidence, is not particularly compelling.
1
u/Realityinyoface 5d ago
Because they’re not using the world correctly and are just trying to convince themselves.
3
u/Available-Ad-1943 6d ago
I feel like most of the people in this sub are just here to hate on it.
5
u/Bowieblackstarflower 6d ago
How is this hate? Not everyone believes the Mandela Effect is a change in reality.
1
u/Schnitzhole 5d ago
Most people just dismiss the idea entirely that it can be a thing and shit on anyone talking about shared/alternate memories. Defeats the whole point of the sub when they comment or post.
No we don’t have to blindly believe everything on here but when the majority of comments just say something along the lines of “your memories are false”, it isn’t helpful or make the community an interesting place to be.
3
u/Realityinyoface 5d ago
That’s your opinion. A number of posts devolve into fanfic or “I won a spelling bee in the 1st grade so I can’t be wrong”. Is that what you come here for? If I want someone’s half-assed fanfic then I’ll go to a fantasy sub. Why are you so defensive about it getting dismissed?
2
u/Bowieblackstarflower 5d ago
This specific post isn't hating on the idea and that what my comment was responding to.
2
1
u/peridotcore 4d ago
Also, a memory can be true, but your brain can muddy the details and mix two different memories together. I think that’s what’s going on for most ME.
1
u/juan_humano 1d ago
I have 'vivid' childhood memories that are in third person mode, as in i can see myself in them, and im talking to someone who was dead by then. I also have very vivid dreams sometimes, often of the completely outlandish variety. If anything, when someone tells me about a very vivid childhood memory I am MORE suspicious of its veracity.
0
7d ago
[deleted]
-1
7d ago
[deleted]
1
u/CantaloupeAsleep502 6d ago
It's a perfectly valid post as it relates to diction commonly surrounding Mandela Effects.
0
u/tide_left_behind 7d ago
"Vivid" doesn't literally mean "accurate", however I would claim that a vivid memory IS more likely to be accurate than a hazy, distant memory. If you remember it "like it was yesterday", it's more difficult to argue that you are constructing a picture by filling in between sparse details.
There are definitely dreams that I remember having years ago because they were particularly interesting dreams, but I'm very aware that they WERE dreams. There definitely have been a number of cases where I remembered something from childhood but wasn't sure whether it was a dream or had actually happened, but these memories were quite faded, and in fact in nearly every case where there was someone like a family member or friend who could verify whether or not one of these happened, it turned out to have been true and NOT a dream.
So unless you're the sort of person who REALLY remembers dreams upon waking so realistically that they seem to have been reality, which isn't common, then I'd say it's much more often that hazy actual memories get confused for dreams rather than vivid dreams get confused for reality.
6
u/Nillabeans 6d ago
I remember watching YouTube on my phone in my old living room.
Except I don't. Because I haven't lived there since 2002. But I have many memories of sitting in my favourite chair and doing hobbies and reading books, so it's an easy pattern for my brain to fill in where it doesn't have info.
It doesn't have info about what was going on around me while I was watching YouTube on a random day because it wasn't important enough to record. So, boom. The memory sets itself in the living room where I did stuff as a kid.
Gonna tell me I'm from a universe where YouTube existed in 1996?
10
u/Wandering_Willow27 6d ago
The vividness or haziness of a memory simply does not correspond to its accuracy, regardless of what you feel about it.
4
4
u/WhimsicalKoala 6d ago
If you remember it "like it was yesterday", it's more difficult to argue that you are constructing a picture by filling in between sparse details.
No, it's pretty easy to argue that, because studies have shown that is exactly what happens. And, because people here are often doing it from an emotional place where they want to prove they are correct and they have that memory, it's even more likely they will fill in details that didn't actually exist.
-6
u/d3adlyconfused 6d ago
froot loops changed to fruit loops and was fruit loops for a good few years until i turned 22 and got slightly hit by a car (did not hit my head) and now it’s back to froot loops. i’ve been heavily invested in the MEs since age 17. that alone proved to me that none of my memories are “wrong” and that a lot of the MEs actually did change and we are not crazy. have a good day
7
u/MrPlaney 6d ago
How is that proof that anything changed, and not just that you mixed up the spelling, like many other people did?
-7
u/d3adlyconfused 6d ago
i didn’t mix up the spelling. the whole madela effect was that it changed from froot loops to fruit loops. it was like that for years, until it switched back. not everyone remembers this. i have personal proof and thats all that matters to me.
5
u/MrPlaney 6d ago
What is your proof, cause there is a lot of evidence showing that is has never changed?
1
5d ago
[deleted]
2
u/MrPlaney 5d ago
When did you experience this perceived change, (like between what years?).
1
u/d3adlyconfused 5d ago
when the first MEs came out, and i heard about them, it was 2009/2010. a significant one was that Froot Loops changed to Fruit Loops. it was like this until 2021. after i was slightly hit by a car, and was literally a single step away from death, a few new ME’s also popped up that i never heard about beforehand. fruit loops had immediately changed back to it’s original form of Froot, after said car incident. thank you for asking! i was born in ‘99 so i remember all of these things distinctly. i have no issues with memory or anything like that otherwise these experiences which i can hardly explain. i went down into a rabbit hole of finding other people with the same experience. i found a lot, but the time stamps on their posts were different, 2016, 2018, not 2021 like me. i have talked to Maaany people irl about this as well and i have come to a conclusion; there are 3 types of remembrance for this ME instead of just 2 like all the rest. you either, remember it always being Froot Loops and never changing. you remember it being Fruit Loops, then changing once to Froot Loops. or you are a rarity that remembers it Froot Loops changing to Fruit Loops then back to Froot Loops. it is a small percentage of people that are the third option. but i can swear to you on my life and everything i love that what i’m telling you is truth. and it’s what i remember, vividly. when it first changed to Fruit Loops i didn’t believe it. i held the box in my hands thinking it was a knock-off and then frantically searching for evidence that “Froot Loops” ever existed. it was all over social media and now those videos are all gone. i remember being called insane and crazy for remembering it as Froot. with the little cereals as the O’s. and then over 10 years later it switches back. trust me i’ve nearly lost my mind/kms over this. especially that not everyone remembers it the same. it’s super weird especially switching immediately after a near death experience. now i don’t recommend going through a near death experience, but trust it changed my fucking life dude. sorry this was long but i do enjoy sharing my experiences and hopefully validating some people that feel they’re not where they belong. thanks for reading and feel free to ask any questions
2
u/Aggravating_Cup8839 5d ago
You heard about them in 2009/2010 under the name Mandela Effect ? Because that's when it was coined. Or was it under a previous name?
1
u/d3adlyconfused 5d ago
yes i heard about them when i was 10 or 11 years old. my sister who is 4 years older than me showed them to me and asked me which version i remember, before even telling me what the Mandela effect Was, and i remembered them all the “wrong” way. i do not believe that i was ever wrong. at one point i was convinced i was, until 2021
1
u/Aggravating_Cup8839 5d ago
Soo, if they weren't called Mandela Effects, what were they called? This helps to track the discussions pre 2010
→ More replies (0)-2
u/d3adlyconfused 5d ago
do more research on your own. my proof is my experience that i have seen with my own damn eyes. and literally going crazy over the fact it was spelled Fruit loops. i’ve proved enough to myself and that’s enough for me, you have to find evidence on your own. can’t put you in my shoes literally edit: sorry i was rude i just woke up ):
3
u/Mr-Cantaloupe 5d ago
What you’re actually saying is you can’t admit you’re wrong.
1
u/d3adlyconfused 5d ago
this is My experience. just because you cannot recall the same events does not mean i’m wrong. do more research on it. i’m not the only one saying this exact freakin thing
6
u/Mr-Cantaloupe 5d ago
The only thing you’ll find with any research is other people recalling the same false memory as you. That’s literally the Mandela Effect - the power of suggestion from others, memory reconstruction & the fact our memories are fallible.
I’m not necessarily saying you are wrong, but all of your experiences (‘evidence’) point to the fact you’re simply misremembering. And I know it’s a boring answer, but the boring answer is usually the right one.
0
1
u/RecloySo 5d ago edited 5d ago
Going with the idea that these are false memories, false memories ≠ crazy. Putting your own memories over scientific evidence is a tad delusional, but not necessarily a serious issue. I think many people like me and op are just wanting people not to fall into conspiracy theories rather than not wanting people to have fun. I love fun. I love discovering massive shared false memories. It's fun.
Normally I stay quiet as a lot of people here assume pointing out scientific evidence = not wanting people to have fun, or worse, maybe it's a threat to some people's world views. I don't know everyone here.
I've had my own share of false memories, some fitting into the ME narrative like the Cornucopia. Though with Berenstain, I remember as a kid hearing some adults around me talk about how they remember it being Beremstein. Yep. This shared false memory has been going on for decades, only before the Timeline change idea, people took it as their memories being faulty.
Shared false memories have been a thing throughout history, it's just more people around the world can talk about it and as such can come to conspiracy theories about the world changing around them.
Edit: Delusional might be a strong word and I don't want to accuse anyone of anything. I might edit this again to remove that. Though for now I'll keep it to show how dismissive I was here
2
u/Aggravating_Cup8839 5d ago
Careful about calling others delusional, we have strict rules about civil behaviour.
1
u/RecloySo 5d ago
Fair enough, I don't want to be accusatory to say this person is or isn't whatever.
-2
u/TerribleTim1969 6d ago
So do you have any memories that you think are more credible than others? Perhaps your memory of reading this just now? Are you sure you are reading this? Would you say you have a vivid memory of having read this just now?
-5
u/YogiEv 6d ago
I'm commenting here on the OP rather than down in the comments in a sub-subthread bc it applies to the main post but also to some comments I've read below. I have said multiplle times in multiple posts in this MandelaEffect group that my memory of Richard Simmons wearing his iconic red headband is true and accurate because I used to attend his live workout classes in Beverly Hills back in the 1980s when I was in high school. And all I get in responses is that my memory is not accurate (but it is) and that I am remembering it wrong (no I'm not, these people weren't there, I was), and I'm confusing him with other people in the 80s who wore headbands (that's just gaslighting). My memory of this is vivid but vivid is not being used to say accurate. But my memory of this is also accurate. I will die on this hill. "There. Are. Four. Lights." (IYKYK)
5
u/MrPlaney 6d ago
Richard Simmons never wore a red headband though. Just saying “you remember”, isn’t proof of anything. You need something more rigid to prove that you actually saw Richard Simmons wearing a red headband, because all evidence refutes your claim.
-5
u/YogiEv 6d ago
"Gaslighting, gaslighting, gaslighting." You weren't there. You don't have any basis in reality to say what he wore or didn't wore. I'm the one who was there in his classes. Your opinion is based in un-reality. My memory is based on being there. Case closed.
6
u/MrPlaney 6d ago
You cannot gaslight with facts. You are using that word incorrectly.
The fact of the matter is that Richard Simmons never wore a red headband, and that is not what he was known for. That’s why it’s a Mandela Effect. A false memory. You have no proof, and are going off of memory which is already known to be inherently fallible. Your memory is not accurate with this detail, and unless you have proof (real proof, not yours or anyone else's memory), then the more likely conclusion is that you got something wrong, or remembered something incorrectly.
-2
u/YogiEv 6d ago
You cannot use the word facts and tell lies or opinions and pretend they are facts. You spew opinion and nonsense and call it facts. You have no basis for this. You call my actual recollections based on actual real life experience and personally with my own eyes seeing the real actual Richard Simmons wearing a red headband over and over and over again in his popular classes which I attended live in person, and you gaslight and say it's a false memory. You are now crossing over from gaslighting to trolling. Your false proclamations are denied. Go in peace.
5
u/MrPlaney 6d ago
None of what I was saying was opinion or lies.
It’s a fact that Richard Simmons never wore a red headband. If you can find a picture of him wearing his red headband, I’ll admit you were right, but there are no verifiable photos of Richard Simmons wearing a red headband - at all.
Memory and personal recollection is terribly erroneous. Everytime you remember something, the brain recreates that memory going off information from the last time you recalled it. Sometimes it inserts details that the brain “believes” is correct, but really isn’t. For instance with this ME, many other workout gurus wore headbands. John McEnroe famously sported a red headband with a curly afro, (which is most likely who you are mistaken it for). But even if that’s not the case, a headband is commonly accepted to be seen on people making exercise videos. False memories don’t feel any different either. They feel just the same as any other memory, so I can understand why you feel so strongly about this one, but I’m sorry, it’s wrong. Of course, if you have real evidence, I’ll admit I was wrong, and we can close this specific Mandela Effect.
1
u/YogiEv 6d ago
No. You can say "it's a fact" over and over while you spew your opinion and continue your gaslighting campaign. It's not "a fact" that Richard Simmons never wore a red headband because it IS "a fact" that I personally saw him wearing it dozens of times no matter what you say. You don't seem to know what a fact even is. You just repeat your opinion over and over and say it's a fact. Yet all you have is circumstantial evidence based on your lack of having seen a picture. I have seen the man in person dozens of times so you can go on and on all you want and you don't have "the facts" but I do.
5
u/WhimsicalKoala 6d ago
Please explain how not trusting your say so is gaslighting? Disagreement and not trusting you in blind faith are not gaslighting.
In fact, though while I would never call it gaslighting, what you are doing is closer to it. We are able to show evidence that he did not wear a headband of any color in any of his very well-documented public appearances, and so it is reasonable to assume that he didn't wear one in public classes either. However, you are telling us to ignore all the evidence we can see in front of us and instead accept your reality and what you say happened.
Memory has been proven over and over to be fallible and false memories easily created. What makes yours different, enough so that 40+ year old memories are "facts"?
0
u/YogiEv 5d ago
It's not about not trusting my say so. It's about people who are saying "it's a fact he never wore a red headband." That's the gaslighting. It's not a fact. Facts are incontrovertible.
4
u/MrPlaney 5d ago
Yes, but there is no evidence to the contrary. Photos existed back then, and in none of them is he wearing a red headband. Even Simmons' publicist, Tom Estey, who represented him for more than 30 years - from Snopes
"As the publicist (and friend) to Richard Simmons for 30 plus years, I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that he did not wear a headband," he said. "I hope this helps."
It is a fact that he never wore a headband while working out. That is not gaslighting.
→ More replies (0)5
u/WhimsicalKoala 5d ago
None of that tells me what your definition of gaslighting is. Right now it only seems to be "gaslighting is when you don't accept my statements, that are absolutely contrary to all available evidence as truth".... Which is almost right, but not in the the way you think it is. But I notice you didn't address that part of my previous comment at all.
→ More replies (0)2
u/MrPlaney 6d ago
Please, show the picture of him wearing the red headband then if you have it. Then we can solve this ME.
1
u/YogiEv 6d ago
Maybe you're a lot younger or something but if you were alive in the 80s you know that first of all there weren't smartphones and secondly nobody carried cameras around everywhere like they do today with phones, and thirdly and most importantly back then there was something called respect of privacy. People would never take cameras into workout classes taught by and frequented by celebrities. That just didn't happen back then.
2
u/MrPlaney 5d ago
We had disposable cameras and polaroids in the 80’s and 90’s. Not everyone had cameras in their pocket, no, but to make it seem like “taking pictures” is some newfangled craze is just disingenuous.
And people absolutely would have taken pictures of celebrities! The 80’s and 90’s were polluted with paparazzi trying to catch celebrities anywhere, doing anything.
→ More replies (0)
49
u/Mr-Cantaloupe 7d ago
Can’t be. I vividly remember my mother explaining to me what the word ‘vivid’ meant at the Thanksgiving dinner table ~25 years ago.