Gary Rosenberg wrote:
>
> Actually, it was Paul Monfils who suggested the restriction of topic to
> genus = common name in the case of Nautilus, not my feeble memory. But the
> topic of memory is a rich one.
>
> I used to give a slide show of close-up photographs of shells. Harry Lee
> identified about 70% of them. No one else has ever gotten more than 50%. I
> would nominate Harry as the reigning champion of extemporaneous identification.
>
> In my prime I could identify more than 5,000 species on sight. I spend too
> much time at a computer these days, so I can't identify as many species as I
> used to. Sometimes I can reel off possibilities--it's this, this or this,
> even if I can't remember which. Even if I can't remember the name at all, I
> can often walk straight to the drawer in the collection and find the
> species. And on two occasions someone has shown me a shell and as I opened
> my mouth to say "I don't know", I said the name instead.
>
> I sometimes go Israeli folk dancing, and it's fascinating to watch the
> different ways that people learn. Some memorize the music first, others
> memorize the motions, and others (such as me) memorize a description of the
> steps. After I've just learned a new dance, I often don't recognize the
> music. I have to stare at people's feet to figure out the steps until it
> dawns on me that I know the dance. But once I've become familiar with the
> dance, the verbal description fades and I remember more by the music and the
> motions. Beginners have to follow behind someone to learn a new dance,
> whereas experienced dancers can follow someone opposite them across the room
> by mirror-imaging the steps in their heads.
>
> I actually had testing for various aptitudes as a teenager. My memory for
> words and numbers is extremely high, my memory for music is purely average.
> My visual memory is only slightly better than average, at least in the
> particular test they gave, which was to state what differences there were,
> if any, between two pictures viewed a few seconds apart. I don't have a
> photographic memory--I have what might be called a synthetic memory. I don't
> generally remember what an individual shell looks like, I remember what the
> species looks like. I wonder if there's a difference in the way the memories
> of lumpers and splitters work?
>
> The debate about using common versus scientific names on Conch-L also comes
> down to an issue of memory. Many subscribers have never seen some of the
> scientific names before, and never heard them pronounced. Most words we
> learn by hearing them. Scientific names are learned by seeing them, unless
> you work in an environment such as a museum where you are likely to hear
> them. That's why common names are easier to learn at first--at least the
> components of the name are usually words that one has heard before.
> Scientific names are not inherently harder than common names--look at little
> kids learning the names of dinosaurs (which they hear all the time). As one
> gets more used to scientific names, they become familiar and the common
> names start fading. So while we dance with shells, let's use both names so
> that everyone can learn the steps.
>
> Gary
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Gary Rosenberg, Ph.D.                     [log in to unmask]
> Malacology & Invertebrate Paleontology    gopher://erato.acnatsci.org
> Academy of Natural Sciences               http://www.acnatsci.org
> 1900 Benjamin Franklin Parkway            Phone 215-299-1033
> Philadelphia, PA 19103-1195 USA           Fax   215-299-1170
 
 
I agree with you Gary....Dr. Lee has to be amazing in
identification..and the interesting part is he is good in all fields...
not just marine shells, but land, tree, fossil, etc.  That is why we
consider him to be such a great judge at Shell Shows and you can always
learn something from Harry.
 
Bobbi
--
Jim & Bobbi Cordy
Specializing in Self-Collected
Caribbean & Florida Shells