Summary Of Remembering And Knowing By Ednel Tulving

The study, “Remembering and Knowing” by Ednel Tulving has created after observations he had found about the way we know and remember things. His thesis is “Remembering one’s past is a different and perhaps more advanced achievement of the brain than simply knowing about it” (cite). His study presents some information worth considering however, there is a need for further studies and explanations for results that did not correspond in the study. If Tulving decides to take another step with this study, he should consider why some of findings were different than the ones he presented.

The thesis of this study is clearly indicated though it is should be more specific. It is evident that the thesis is well constructed and thought out. He gives

As a results of the patient’s, lesions resulted in his amnesia, in his case having no recollection of past personal memories. K.C. however, knows many things such as, how to read and write, how to play chess and that his family owns a cottage but does not remember learning these facts. This argument corresponds with the thesis that knowing and remembering are two different aspects of the memory. One would also accept the thesis after looking at the brain study presented in the second argument. The brain study shows the flow of blood to different regions of the brain when it is presented questions to do with semantic and episodic memory. From the photos presented in this study, there is indications from the blood flow that information from the episodic memory is mostly processed in the frontal lobes. From the images, there is indications that semantic information is processed in the mid region of the brain. The study of the brain, allows for those in support of the to see the different regions of the brain highlighted when semantic and episodic memory is being invocate.

In opposition, this study may not be supported by healthy skepticism. The first argument presented on K.C., is a rare finding that has never been seen before. It is difficult to support a claim on one single account of the episodic memory being lost. The second argument, on the brain study, is equally hard to accept. Tulving, the researcher states that some of the findings in the blood flow study of episodic and semantic memory he found did not support the thesis (cite). In order to confirm a thesis, there needs to be a reason why some people’s blood flow did not correspond with the study while others