How to Become a Memory: The Individual and Collective Aspects of Mnemicity.

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Topics in Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-17 DOI:10.1111/tops.12646
Johannes B Mahr
{"title":"How to Become a Memory: The Individual and Collective Aspects of Mnemicity.","authors":"Johannes B Mahr","doi":"10.1111/tops.12646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Human adults distinguish their mental event simulations along various dimensions-most prominently according to their \"mnemicity\": we track whether these simulations are outcomes of past personal experiences or not (i.e., whether we are \"remembering\" or \"imagining\"). This distinction between memory and imagination is commonly thought to reflect a deep architectural distinction in the mind. Against this idea, I argue that mnemicity is not based on a fundamentalstructural difference between memories and imaginations but is instead the result of metacognitive attribution and social construction. On this attributional view, mnemicity is likely a uniquely human capacity that both serves collective functions and has been shaped by collective norms. First, on the individual level, mnemicity attribution is an outcome of metacognitive learning: it relies on acquired interpretations of the phenomenal features of mental event simulations. Such interpretations are in part acquired through interactive reminiscing with other community members. Further, how the distinction between memory and imagination is drawn is likely sensitive to cultural norms about what remembering is, when it is appropriate to claim to remember, what can be remembered, and what remembering entails. As a result, how individuals determine whether they remember or imagine is bound to be deeply enculturated. Second, mnemicity attribution solves an important collective challenge: who to grant epistemic authority about the past. Solving this challenge is important because-for humans-the past represents not just an opportunity to learn about the future but to coordinate present social realities. How a community determines such social realities both draws on individuals' remembering and in turn shapes when, what, and how individuals remember.</p>","PeriodicalId":47822,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Cognitive Science","volume":" ","pages":"225-240"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12646","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Human adults distinguish their mental event simulations along various dimensions-most prominently according to their "mnemicity": we track whether these simulations are outcomes of past personal experiences or not (i.e., whether we are "remembering" or "imagining"). This distinction between memory and imagination is commonly thought to reflect a deep architectural distinction in the mind. Against this idea, I argue that mnemicity is not based on a fundamentalstructural difference between memories and imaginations but is instead the result of metacognitive attribution and social construction. On this attributional view, mnemicity is likely a uniquely human capacity that both serves collective functions and has been shaped by collective norms. First, on the individual level, mnemicity attribution is an outcome of metacognitive learning: it relies on acquired interpretations of the phenomenal features of mental event simulations. Such interpretations are in part acquired through interactive reminiscing with other community members. Further, how the distinction between memory and imagination is drawn is likely sensitive to cultural norms about what remembering is, when it is appropriate to claim to remember, what can be remembered, and what remembering entails. As a result, how individuals determine whether they remember or imagine is bound to be deeply enculturated. Second, mnemicity attribution solves an important collective challenge: who to grant epistemic authority about the past. Solving this challenge is important because-for humans-the past represents not just an opportunity to learn about the future but to coordinate present social realities. How a community determines such social realities both draws on individuals' remembering and in turn shapes when, what, and how individuals remember.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
如何成为记忆:记忆的个人和集体方面。
成年人会根据不同的维度来区分他们的心理事件模拟--其中最突出的维度是根据它们的 "半明半暗性":我们会追踪这些模拟是否是过去个人经历的结果(即,我们是在 "记忆 "还是在 "想象")。人们通常认为,记忆与想象之间的这种区别反映了思维中深层次的结构区别。针对这一观点,我认为 "记忆"(mnemicity)并非基于记忆与想象之间的基本结构差异,而是元认知归因和社会建构的结果。根据这种归因观点,记忆力很可能是人类独有的能力,既能发挥集体功能,又受集体规范的影响。首先,在个人层面上,迷思归因是元认知学习的结果:它依赖于对心理事件模拟的现象特征的后天解释。这种解释部分是通过与其他社区成员的互动回忆获得的。此外,如何区分记忆和想象,很可能对有关记忆是什么、何时适合声称记忆、可以记忆什么以及记忆需要什么的文化规范很敏感。因此,个人如何确定自己是记忆还是想象,必然会受到文化的深刻影响。其次,记忆归属解决了一个重要的集体难题:由谁来授予关于过去的认识论权威。解决这一难题之所以重要,是因为对于人类来说,过去不仅是了解未来的机会,也是协调当前社会现实的机会。一个群体如何确定这种社会现实既依赖于个人的记忆,又反过来影响着个人记忆的时间、内容和方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Topics in Cognitive Science
Topics in Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: Topics in Cognitive Science (topiCS) is an innovative new journal that covers all areas of cognitive science including cognitive modeling, cognitive neuroscience, cognitive anthropology, and cognitive science and philosophy. topiCS aims to provide a forum for: -New communities of researchers- New controversies in established areas- Debates and commentaries- Reflections and integration The publication features multiple scholarly papers dedicated to a single topic. Some of these topics will appear together in one issue, but others may appear across several issues or develop into a regular feature. Controversies or debates started in one issue may be followed up by commentaries in a later issue, etc. However, the format and origin of the topics will vary greatly.
期刊最新文献
Distributional Semantics: Meaning Through Culture and Interaction. Metaphors and the Invention of Writing. Moral Association Graph: A Cognitive Model for Automated Moral Inference. Processing Fluency and Predictive Processing: How the Predictive Mind Becomes Aware of its Cognitive Limitations. Language Production and Prediction in a Parallel Activation Model.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1