A Memory Shortcut, With a Little Help From Friends

Oh no, the link to Clark & Chalmers seminal paper, "The Extended Mind," is BAD! Here is a good link: http://consc.net/papers/extended.html If you liked that, or especially if you didn't, here are some responses to consider: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/19564 Clark & Chalmers argue for "externalism": "Externalism in the philosophy of mind contends that the meaning or content of a thought is partly determined by the environment." https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/self-knowledge-externalism/ This is an argument in support of relativism. That is, everything is relatively true. There is no absolute truth. Ponder that deeply....

Our ability to remember is influenced by how much there is to remember. We've had to externalize a lot of what we need to remember simply because there is so much and the time available to commit something to memory is often short. Think of life in a pre-printing press village and compare that to life in 21st century America. At one level, there's nothing wrong with depending on external memory "devices," be the other people or "things" such as notebooks, computers, etc. With rare exceptions, people simply couldn't manage to keep every piece of information we need in their brains alone. Unfortunately, however, both the volume of "need to know" information and the lure of devices have made it easy to give up on even trying to use our own brains to remember information that could be critical and needed instantly.

When I was in graduate school for creative writing, I often got ideas for poems in the middle of the night. Too lazy to get up and write them down, I trained myself to memorize up to 10 or 12 lines of poetry pretty well. I still try to do this for random ideas, and on a good night can retain about 10 items. I had to memorize Latin passages in high school and I am sure that helped. Later, when I performed a one woman show in my 40's I memorized one hour's worth of monologue--24 pages of text. It took about 3 weeks, and I was systematic about it. One page a day, saying, writing, recalling, listening to a tape. Now in my 60's, my memory is not as amazing as it was, but with calm effort, I can do OK. I especially recommend NOT filling your mind with unimportant trivia, and not trying to remember things you don't need to, but focusing with intention. I first tell myself how many things I need to remember (until I can write them down), use mnemonics. I sometimes teach, and when I lose my train of thought--it just disappears--I don't freak out, I tell the class I lost my train of thought and we'll move on to something else until I remember. Which I often do. When alone, returning to the place where I had the idea I need to recall often works. As actors use blocking to remember lines.

A senior architect was incredulous. “You don’t know the maximum stair riser height for a residence??” Actually, I didn’t care to store such information in my noggin. Apparently, at one time in the not too distant past having minutae on the tip of one’s tongue demonstrated professional competence. To my way of thinking “knowing” such a detail meant remembering the code mandated riser heights in the several US states in which our firm practiced, and knowing if there had been a recent code change and whether riser height was affected by the change. Moreover, on occasion local municipal codes or codes pertaining to special concerns such disabilities supercedes state codes. Given that misremembering a small number could have drastic liabilities such as permit disapproval, redesign and delay, or worse: construction inspector-ordered removal of non-compliant stair and design and construction of its replacement, I choose to err on the side of circumspection. “Let me confirm that.” “You shouldn’t have to,” he said, shaking his head and walking away. Both of us were sure we were dealing with an idiot.

I really wish this article had been published while I was in undergrad and law school! I had known back then that my class notes qualify as a component of my memory, I would've brought them to every final exam that I had to do from memory!

I find this line also problematic, as it's been proven repeatedly to be not equivalent: "...manipulate words on a page (or the digital equivalent)". Physically transcribing something from your brain to paper creates a stronger record of it than typing on a computer, both for long-term memory and working through conceptual ideas or their expression.

For seniors, who’s elevator to their memory locker has slowed, there’s Alexa.

I will mention this to my French teacher. As long as she knows French, why not just take her on my trips instead of trying to cram all that weird grammer into my 70 year old brain?!

Wikipedia! As one who was brought up without any reference books, Wikipedia provides the world at our fingertips. The key is participation. When you insert your own specific information in an article, you become a part of this monumental compendium of information. You trust the process but still understand that it is the product of mere mortals like yourself. Often what you write an "edit," it may be rejected, and with luck there is a conversation that ideally leads to a synthesis. Of course the term "to google" means to have only the knowledge that a body of information exists, and then have it available in a few seconds. Memory is not only what you know, but what you know that you don't know. We now live in an age where that is the beginning, rather than the end of the endeavor.

This article popped on the screen shortly after a review of the year 1968. Recently I've been focused on my memories of that year and find myself wanting to chat with old friends with shared memories. New devices assist us as we age but are no substitutes for the emotional and neural connections of friends and family. When our connections are severed by death it truly feels as though integral parts of ourselves are fading. Fighting against isolation is as strenuous as memorizing phone numbers. The challenge is to build and maintain a lifelong web.

On the day I started my internship as a physician-in-training, I received a pocket-sized formulary with drug names and dosages that I consulted over and over again every day. The information was simple for each drug, usually presented on a milligram (of drug) per kilogram (of body weight) ratio. Since I had just graduated medical school and memorized volumes of literature, memorizing the information in the formulary, at least for the most commonly used drugs, should have been simple and would have saved me lots of time; however, because the information was in a pocket-sized book I carried everywhere (unless I misplaced it,) I could never commit the information to memory. I rationalized this by thinking it's too important to get it right, so I should always consult the formulary to avoid under or overdosing anyone. Although one can always consult a book, Google, Wikipedia, PDR or a colleague and get information, there is an efficiency factor that memorizing information provides that saves lots of time. How we use these external repositories of knowledge is idiosyncratic and depends on the information and individual. No one can learn everything; however, relying on these sources for information you need recurrently and frequently does slow you down. Is this experience relevant to the discussion?

I think that there are exceptions to the binary choice of taking a photo vs being fully present to see and absorb what's in front of you. When I used to take pictures while alone, wandering new or familiar places, with eyes open, undistracted by companions, I sometimes made connections to places that were very strong and memorable. But It wasn't about snapping something every few feet, or taking photos of famous highlights, all of which are readily available, but finding something that seemed the essence of my experience.

Yes, I understand the utility of using an appropriate technology for keeping track of information that's somewhere along that range between curious and essential. I know someday (real soon now) I'm going to write something that'll be insightful and profound, that will require that I delve into my Evernote heap and the Notes on my iPhone and the stack of dog eared, scribbled index cards I've accumulated. Tools like those are handiest for tasks which are not time critical, when I can think things over and compose and revise. But they're not all that helpful in the midst of a simple conversation or an earnest discussion — or especially a heated debate. And since — compared to my production of insightful and profound tomes — I spend more time in verbal give and take, I also try to keep as much stuff as possible in my head (with varying degrees of success). Frequently, what you know can be more useful than what you know how to find.

The difference between remembering something on your own and getting information purely from an external thing or person is that in the first case, you experience recognition—the sensation of retrieving something you already knew. Clark and Chalmers say nothing about the experience of recognition, but it's crucial to human life. Yes, I can happily do without recognizing a phone number, but if I were deprived of recognizing what matters most to me, this wouldn't be MY life at all anymore.

I was struck by the research that indicates that looking at something is more memorable than photographing it. 40 years ago I went whale watching off Portsmouth. We saw a mother humpback and her calf-right along side the ship-very much eye to eye. Most people were frantically snapping pictures. I just looked at her in absolute wonder for the privilege of seeing her. And I thought at the time: I think that I will remember this better than those people who have a layer of glass and buttons intervening, and who are so busy fiddling around. I can still see that whale in my mind. I'm intrigued that research confirms this intuition. At 65 I am beginning to need a lot of help recalling the mundane however. I need all kinds of memory extenders to find the keys.

Like a couple of other writers, I wonder how happy the author's colleagues will be the second time he asks them the same question. If a friend just wrote a book on a subject, surely you don't expect him to regurgitate information that would, at least, be accessible through the index to his book?

In medical school we call these memory helping devices our “ectopic brains”. It was a little notebook for us back in the 1980’s when I was in school. Now, of course, it’d be an iphone which I now use daily in my medical practice to look up details that need updated regularly - like medication dosing and possible side effects. If i tried to memorize these details instead it is more likely I’d make a mistake since the information changes. And even if i could recall exactly everything I was taught in Med School I’d bet almost half of it would be wrong now anyways.

“If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.” ― Mark Twain The memory-helper for the age of Trump.

My husband and I share the work of thinking: he has outsourced his fading memory to me and I have outsourced my faulty sense of direction to him. For words, we use a dictionary, for names, our children.

Definitely some interesting perspectives on what memory is and the prosthetics we can use to substitute for it or enhance it. When it comes to help from friends, though, there is a different type of cost not involved with the other methods: Their time and trouble. I wonder how the author factors that in.

I do not (mostly) disagree with this assessment, and, certainly advocate use of any memory aids to help one function effectively; however, the fact remains, one can NOT think without facts in ones head, so, be careful how much information you trust to other methods, be they people, devices, paper,...

Vision and movement require the firing of neurons.

I find Frakt a little off-putting for at least two reasons: "...I make it clear who has ownership of it..." and in this way Frakt makes it clear that HE is the BIG BOSS!" "...myriad demands associated with my children’s school..." Unless Frakt actually has children from a previous marriage, I have to wonder why he didn't write OUR children's school?" To me, it comes across as more evidence of Frakt's desire to announce his dominant role in things. I don't think I will sign up for his blog.

Relying on a colleague or spouse to remember "stuff" for oneself is rather last century considering there are digital calendars and online sites one may share, that everyone may access and edit (including live from different locations, all at once). Google Calendar and Drive are excellent examples, and Wunderlist is an example of a great way to be organized and remember "stuff" and to share with family, co-workers or friends. I teach nursing school and my colleagues and I use these, and I recommend them to my students (I am many years past millenial age, but remain relevant!)

I think every couple has its own memory hierarchy.

Even 15 years ago, a close friend called his now-outmoded PDA his "brain." If he needed to know something, he put it in the PDA. I do the same now with a cloud app, for information like when I last had a vaccination, what medications I take and surgeries I had years ago. A digital calendar keeps me on track on a daily basis. Not using these extended "memories" would be foolish, in my opinion, when they are so readily available to me.

"The information isn’t [is not in your mind], and it may never be." I take some exception to that statement. There is likely much more information between your ears but you cannot necessarily access it for any number of reasons that are yet to be fully understood.

Consider Beau Lotto's book, "Deviate: The Science of Seeing Differently" (NY:Hachette, 2017).