Andrew Huberman· PhD
And as a consequence, he lost all explicit memory.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And as a consequence, he lost all explicit memory.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
So all psychology neuroscientists neuroscience students know him. Uh he was operated in 1954 and the paper was published in 1957. Um they removed both his hippocampi because he had very terrible epilepsy and um they knew that the hippocampus was the genesis of of epilepsy and this was experimental. his epilepsy was so bad that they decided not just to remove one hippocampus but both. And what happened was immediate um immediate loss of all ability to form new memories for facts and events.