Thread: Memory: the Forgotten Fundamental

Yay discussion ^^
I should probably go over all the replies before posting, but I must say I disagree to a very large extent with you Sageous: hopefully we can get something positive from this clash of perspectives

I’ll start by assuming something so I don’t keep mistaking it in future replies: when you say self-awareness is just one of the factors, being memory another, you’re assuming the lucid dreaming experience as a whole, and not just induction right? I assumed so, but let me know if I’m wrong.

The main point to be made regarding your perspective is you don’t exactly define the relevance of memory: in the context of being “the storehouse of a lifetime of information, sensations, experiences, relationships, emotions, images, and everything else that combines to form, ultimately, an individual.” I’d say that seems a bit umbrella at best: it’s not that things like MILD (which stems from prospective memory) present themselves as functions, but as types. And this make all the difference: episodic memory is by no means relevant to lucidity in the sense that you don’t need the background of your personal life to act lucidly: if I erased 10 years of your life you would still be able to act accordingly with the realization that you were asleep, could not be harmed, were not bound to laws of physics, etc etc. Even assuming you would therefore loose the memory of going to bed, that still wouldn’t deterred you from employing other processes that would allow you to rationalize that harm and impossibilities would nothing but a step you could climb above in your current (dream scenario). In fact, given the distinction I made in the first paragraph (about your post being about lucid dreaming experience and not just induction), even prospective memory is largely useless (or more correctly, way less relevant) after lucidity is reacher, due the fact that retrospective memory alone allows you to recall plans, as opposed to recall intentions under a set of conditions/time (typical of prospective memory).

This leads me to my second and most crucial point on the disagreement with your perspective, or more specifically, with this paragraph:

“ It is not that your mind is addled or your so-called “dream logic” is flawed, as it is popular to believe; no, your cognition is working fine in dreams. What is missing, or rather what is inaccessible during NLD's, is your storehouse of experience and knowledge from which you could gather that there really are, say, no swimming pools on the moon. “

Cognition encompasses memory by definition, but let’s ignore that for the sake of practicality. Once again, right away, we’d need to trim that definition of memory given in the start of the post: episodic memory is useless (and it fits the best with your description of memory) and maybe it’s actually harmful: what would elicit a more neutral and critical response to a stimulus? A stimulus that evokes a more visceral/emotional response by the individual (provoked due episodic memory) or a stimulus that has no “strings attached” and can be perceived in an almost “scientifical” perspective (by this I mean: as a simple observer without connection to the object of study)?
After that, we’d need to actually pick on the definition of self-awareness: cognition processes that escape to some degree memory (emphasis on “some degree”) but still build on aspects that go beyond the definition of memory you gave: I do need working memory to be self-aware, but I probably need working memory to practically all cognition processes, so saying it’s important is not very necessary in my opinion, as it’s already implied. But I certainly do not need to tap into certain content to be able to employ mechanics of self-monitoring, self-perception, and to reason regarding the situation I’m being presented with in my dreams.
A practical way to verify this perspective would be stating that people with retrograde amnesia would be capable of dreaming. According to your perspective (that we have to tap into our memory) this would be impossible, or am I mistaking some point? Because it assumes that a person with no memory would not be able to reach self-awareness into a dream (just for the case, I’d even wager they’d have a small advantage over normal people). And in case you agree, this leads me again to the need to divert from umbrella terms, because the definition of memory you gave, even if only for the purposes of the talk, misses on a lot of technicalities that we could discuss.

“Remembering those things I said above, like that your sleeping body is right where you left it, should help re-attach your consciousness to your core memory and allow your self-awareness to assert itself with proper waking-life awareness. This action will redefine the “reality” of the dream, the rules of the dream, and perhaps even the dream itself. So, you cannot have true -- and certainly not strong -- waking-life self-awareness in your dream if you do not remember that the dream-character body you are currently occupying is not your physical body. “

Why not? Let’s assume that the typical short-term memory duration would be enough to allow you to WILD and still be able to recall the experience in the last 12-20 seconds (just a wild guess…oh hey I made a pun xD). Without the memory that you were asleep but with other cognitive processes possible wouldn’t you be able to have a fulfilling experience? In other words, do you really need that specific memory in order to grasp the characteristics of a dream world? I’d agree that to some point a person that isn’t aware that she is actually in her bed safe and sound might have some initial issues with dream control, but you certainly don’t need any kind of episodic memory….at some point, the realization that you are dreaming would naturally escape the need for the recall.
Unless you’re referring to this “body in bed” as “information”? That would make me agree a lot more, but there would still present the same issue: what would make you jump from a building faster? Knowing that you can presently pass your hand through your body like it was made of smoke, or having a memory of being asleep just moments ago? My point: we do know that self-awareness can initiate/trigger/represent lucidity without memory, why would such a large extent of memory be crucial to the consequential experience?

“Second, once you’ve passed this initial hurdle, you likely will have switched your brain’s memory-access circuits back to the “on” position, from the “off” position to which they are naturally set during sleep. This will allow you to remember your current dream goals, prolonging techniques, the waking-world histories of the dream-characters populating your dream (giving you opportunity to wonder/explain what they’re doing there), and a host of other things. Basically, you will be truly awake in the dream when memory is accessed, and waking-life self-awareness (aka: lucidity) will have opportunity to prosper.”

A danger paragraph to me: I know you’re just using lay-terms for the sake of simplicity, but memory is never turned off: did you ever try remembering where you were in the middle of a dream? You’d become lucid: not because of memory, but because of the realization that derived from it, which derived from the other processes that surpass memory (especially using the definition of reposition of information/experience). But imagine that you could not remember where you were 15 minutes ago, but you saw Obama with a 10-feet bears using shorts and a katana? If these specific cognition processes (like logic) weren’t turned off, or more correctly, performing at a lowered degree (because they are still there!), you’d be lucid without the need of many types of memory. I’m not putting memory out of the equation, because your first thought might be “zoth, you’d still need to know who Obama is”, but I’m currently limited by your definition ^^
Also about this, the only type of memory that you didn’t include in your definition, prospective memory, is exactly the one that is working both when you mention goals (recall the mantra “I will do X when I become lucid) and maybe even when you employ the mantra “I will remember”: memory that doesn’t require previous information or events, but refers only to future events.

A last thought, that might also act as a TLDR:
If I forget to take my shoes when I arrive home, is it because I can’t access the memory that my parents told me to do so, or might it be because….my attention was diverted to other things?

PS: I left out any reference to several studies and other threads, but that neuroimaging study and several others would also help cast a light on this topic. Time to go over all the replies now ^^

Zoth:

Though I am happy you joined the conversation, I'm afraid that I must respectfully say that you seem to be having a bit of trouble seeing the forest for the trees here. The whole point of this thread and my so-called perspective is to discuss memory in its role as the big-picture, umbrella-termed component of your mind that basically carries the definition of who you are -- and when you cannot connect with memory in a LD, you are missing a major portion of your self, and of lucidity. That connection is with memory in general, and not any particular episodic memory.

That is really all I need to say because, honestly, your scientific knowledge in these arenas far outranks mine, and I'm sure that everything you said in your posts was spot-on accurate -- for the bit of memory or its uses that you were discussing at any one point, of course (you've accurately identified every "memory tree" there is, but overlooked the memory forest). Also, I do not want to argue with you about this, because, again, your facts are generally correct and all I can do is repeatedly ask you to step out of the forest for a second and consider memory as a whole -- umbrella terms and all. But, since you put so much into this, here are a few specific responses that I hope will make sense, or at least encourage you to read the thread again, only without the microscope:

Originally Posted by Zoth

I’ll start by assuming something so I don’t keep mistaking it in future replies: when you say self-awareness is just one of the factors, being memory another, you’re assuming the lucid dreaming experience as a whole, and not just induction right? I assumed so, but let me know if I’m wrong.

That was indeed the correct assumption; induction doesn't matter on this thread.

The main point to be made regarding your perspective is you don’t exactly define the relevance of memory: in the context of being “the storehouse of a lifetime of information, sensations, experiences, relationships, emotions, images, and everything else that combines to form, ultimately, an individual.” I’d say that seems a bit umbrella at best

As it was meant to be; I am not looking to scientifically describe each facet of memory here, but discuss the importance of the cumulative result of all those facets.

...episodic memory is by no means relevant to lucidity in the sense that you don’t need the background of your personal life to act lucidly: if I erased 10 years of your life you would still be able to act accordingly with the realization that you were asleep, could not be harmed, were not bound to laws of physics, etc etc.

But what if you erased all the years of my life, which is essentially what happens in a NLD? Would I be able to act accordingly then? I'm not sure. Lack of access to memory in dreams, mixed with the fictitious memories created by your unconscious, effectively replaces your entire life with a world that started just five minutes earlier. Accessing memory negates the perceived reality of that world; and that access is of memory in general, and no specific episode -- so you can erase as many years as you want to, as long as there is some part of waking-life "you" available to confirm that the place you are in during a dream is not real.

Even assuming you would therefore lose the memory of going to bed, that still wouldn’t deterred you from employing other processes that would allow you to rationalize that harm and impossibilities would nothing but a step you could climb above in your current (dream scenario).

What processes, exactly, would allow you to be fully yourself in a dream without remembering who you actually are? Processes and techniques to manipulate those processes mostly tend to be tools for accessing memory, if you look closely enough at them.

Cognition encompasses memory by definition, but let’s ignore that for the sake of practicality. Once again, right away, we’d need to trim that definition of memory given in the start of the post: episodic memory is useless (and it fits the best with your description of memory)

Here I think is the core of our disagreement: I was not talking specifically about episodic memory. It isn't the individual events and remembered moments that matter, it is the accumulation of all of those moments (and their accompanying emotions, knowledge, and experience), the greater whole "You" that they define simply by existing. Indeed, I wasn't talking about the various functions of memory at all, but simply memory... if you can understand that perspective, you will understand what I'm talking about here, and maybe why I think it matters in terms of lucidity.

I do need working memory to be self-aware, but I probably need working memory to practically all cognition processes, so saying it’s important is not very necessary in my opinion, as it’s already implied.

This is true. Unfortunately, because it has been so consistently ignored, the importance of memory as a whole to cognition and self-awareness has been set aside in favor of specific techniques that that might trigger bits of it here and there, or use some of its processes (like prospective memory with MILD), but never serve to remind a dreamer that there is a whole chunk of his mind that is mostly out of the picture, even in LD's.

But I certainly do not need to tap into certain content to be able to employ mechanics of self-monitoring, self-perception, and to reason regarding the situation I’m being presented with in my dreams.

Nobody said you did. In fact, I even think I said the remembering your sleeping body exercise was not about tapping certain content at all.

A practical way to verify this perspective would be stating that people with retrograde amnesia would be capable of dreaming. According to your perspective (that we have to tap into our memory) this would be impossible, or am I mistaking some point? Because it assumes that a person with no memory would not be able to reach self-awareness into a dream (just for the case, I’d even wager they’d have a small advantage over normal people).

I would imagine a person with retrograde amnesia might be able to know they are dreaming, sure, and they might even be able to do some limited advanced LD'ing. This is because, again, it is not about accessing specific episodic memories but accessing memory, period, so that you can know that the dreaming body you occupy is not your real body, and that there is still a physical world behind the curtain of your dreams and sleep... you do not need to remember anything specific to be able to do this.

And in case you agree, this leads me again to the need to divert from umbrella terms, because the definition of memory you gave, even if only for the purposes of the talk, misses on a lot of technicalities that we could discuss.

Missing out on a lot of technicalities was my direct intention. Those technicalities are good to know in their own right, but really are not helpful when considering memory in its entirely... I do not need to understand the role of every bolt and wire used in its construction to appreciate the fact that a suspension bridge will help me cross a river. I also don't need to understand the myriad bits of physics involved in engineering a suspension bridge in order to admire its beauty. This is all about the umbrella, Zoth!

Let’s assume that the typical short-term memory duration would be enough to allow you to WILD and still be able to recall the experience in the last 12-20 seconds (just a wild guess…oh hey I made a pun xD). Without the memory that you were asleep but with other cognitive processes possible wouldn’t you be able to have a fulfilling experience? In other words, do you really need that specific memory in order to grasp the characteristics of a dream world?

No, you don't; but grasping the characteristics of the dream world is not what we're discussing here. This thread is not a technique tutorial. I almost immediately regretted, BTW, including the "remember your sleeping body" part as soon as I wrote it, because it loosely implied that I am presenting a technique.

I’d agree that to some point a person that isn’t aware that she is actually in her bed safe and sound might have some initial issues with dream control, but you certainly don’t need any kind of episodic memory….at some point, the realization that you are dreaming would naturally escape the need for the recall.

I never, even once, said that you need any kind of episodic memory, and yes, you can certainly enjoy your LD without recalling anything specific. Okay, I think I've said that bit enough times, now, I'm sure you get it.

Unless you’re referring to this “body in bed” as “information”? That would make me agree a lot more, but there would still present the same issue: what would make you jump from a building faster? Knowing that you can presently pass your hand through your body like it was made of smoke, or having a memory of being asleep just moments ago? My point: we do know that self-awareness can initiate/trigger/represent lucidity without memory, why would such a large extent of memory be crucial to the consequential experience?

Once again, this has nothing to do with what I was saying, Zoth, but I will say that if you have accessed memory it is a lot easier to pass your hand through your body because you now know, with the assertion of your own memory, that what you are passing your hand through (and your hand, for that matter) is not real. And, with that knowledge, your actions and capabilities truly become unlimited.... all without accessing one single episodic memory!

I know you’re just using lay-terms for the sake of simplicity, but memory is never turned off

I never sad it was turned off; not even once. In fact, I believe I specifically said memory is always active, and it is access that is turned off (even in that paragraph of mine that you noted).

Originally Posted by Zoth

Like I said, saying memory is important for everything makes it irrelevant to mention. It's like saying oxygen is important to play the flute.

Try playing that flute in a vacuum, and you will understand what I'm discussing here. Thanks for that excellent analogy, BTW.

I hope some of this made sense, Zoth, and sorry about all the parsing (I tried not to take anything out of context). I also hope that you try to look at this subject in "umbrella" terms for at least a moment. Sometimes the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, and the whole should never be defined or constrained by the behavior of one or two of those parts.