The Human Experience, And John Russon's Theory Of Memory

Memory is often described as a process in which information is stored and can later be retrieved. It is considered nothing more than a chemical and sometimes physical catalyst for the mind. However, not all see memory as simply a scientific and robotic process. Some argue that memory is in fact more than just a “storage place.” One such person is John Russon. In his book, entitled The Human Experience, Russon presents new ideas and opinions about memory. Russon talks about how memory is a very personal experience. He also describes memory as being much deeper than what is simply found in one’s head. Yet, out of all his theories on memory one stood out above the rest. And that is his theory of memory. Russon’s theory of memory is the belief

In chapter 3 of his book, Russon divulges what he feels about memory and what dictates them. He immediately dispels the common idea that memory is just pictures. In fact, Russon states, “ We tend to think of memory as a picture gallery in our head…[but]...memory itself is to be found in what we experience,...” (39). Russon’s point is that memories are created from experiences not instances. Even though people tend to think them simple, memories are actually complex. They require certain events which then lead to certain actions. Russon thus implies that memories are the reasons for our actions. And that all these experiences, events, triggers, etc… of memories are actually objects. Behind every memory is an object. Objects are the determining factor when it comes to memories. According to Russon, “ Our memory, most fundamentally, is what we experience as the determinateness of objects that communicates to us what we can and cannot do” (41). In other words, Russon is saying objects trigger and stimulate our memories. They are the reasons we act, maintain, and reflect on certain things. Objects and memories share a relationship that cause our actions. Without objects we wouldn’t have memories. We embed memories into objects and we recall them when we open the objects. Russon is thus asserting that in order for us to have and recall memories we need objects. All of which is the basis for his theory of

When you come to evaluate his theory it makes a lot of sense. His theory is that memories revolve and are dictated around objects. I believe his idea to be true. The reason for that is that in his theory, Russon suggests that we ourselves are objects so we can recall memories. I know that’s possible because I can recall my own memories. When we remember our memories its because we have put a part of ourselves in them. We (objects) thus become containers of our memories. Russon also argues that our memories (experiences) can be the the result of other objects. When we put a part of ourselves in an object it becomes a memory. The object is then the basis for a memory. An example of the is when we have a stuffed animal. It’s not the stuffed animal that we recall it 's the comfort the we felt behind the animal that allows it to become a memory. When we place a personal part of ourselves in an object it allows us come back and remember it. It forms a personal connection between the rabbit and ourselves. Which is why I believe Russon’s theory to very correct. Objects are the cause of our