Sparks for Inquiry

Research into imagination and memory may well be undertaken starting, even before in the psychologist or neuroscientist’s laboratory or in the philosopher of mind’s, in the study of the historian. As notes Carruthers (1), “ancient and medieval people…[describe their] greatest geniuses…as people of superior memories [read, imaginations, following Carruthers (1-4)], [and] they boast unashamedly of their prowess in that faculty.” Ancient and medieval scholars considered imagination (specifically, imagined “palaces” of memory) “[what] made knowledge into useful experience, [and what]…combined these pieces of information-become-experiences into what we call ‘ideas.’” Because ancient and medieval scholars utilized imagination-based techniques of memory centrally in their lives and conceptualized memory as a natural capacity able to be trained (147), research into imagination — spontaneously used or applied in precise techniques — may perhaps best begin with an understanding of the works of scholars from these periods and their traditions of thought and approach. As a student of art often studies the works of master painters as the best examples to hone his own skill and understanding of his craft, and as the medical student studies normal cadavers and healthy patients in order to understand the optimum functioning of the body, the memories and memory techniques of ancient and medieval scholars may be taken as ideal examples of memory and imagination to study. In them, patterns that may extend to the basest levels of functioning of the phenomena of imagination are perhaps present to be appreciated, even if anecdotally, suggesting directions in which empirical study may most fruitfully progress. These mnemonic techniques and explanations of imagination may be taken by the modern scientist as specimens to shape his or her questions for inquiry.

For scholars of these periods, imagination-based mnemonics both for memory of “things” (i.e., for themes, objects, people, etc.) (Carruthers 149) and memory of “words” (i.e., word-for-word memorized transcripts) were available for use and were considered central to the life of virtue (73): memories were seen as disposition-forming and so as foundational for the fostering and executing of moral (as well as intellectual) virtues (cf. Aristotle 452a29-30). The most successful mnemonics relied on “visual images[,]…the keenest of all and best retained by the memory; auditory or other perceptions…[being] retained when attached to visual ones,” states Carruthers (78). It was further argued through the use of such techniques that “images are retained more easily than abstract thoughts, but they ‘require an abode.’” This ‘abode’ was usually, in what was called by the Romans the Method of Loci and by Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas the Greatest Mnemonic, a vividly-imagined location in which were placed symbolic objects that cued recall as an individual walked through his or her imagined location. Carruthers (149) notes the importance of imagination in these techniques, and also implicates emotions in their use, stating that “it is the imagines [images] that can be fixed by the mind’s eyes and that arouse again one’s emotional response…to the initial matter.” The understanding of memory as bodily both allowed for its relation to disposition and, purportedly, for its ability to be trained (as would any muscle be trained) (48).

Augustine’s inner world is one defined in terms of “fields and spaces” and as a treasury formally based on objects of past sense-perception but requiring no current sensory input to be explored and enjoyed within his mind (93, 97). This conceptualization of an internal world is one that is tactile and otherwise sensory (or at least based on sensory impressions). It is a fantastic inner version of an outer world. This conceptualization, however, may be seen from everyday experience not to be normal in contemporary society. Anecdotally, the popular idea of an inner/internal world is, it seems, significantly more abstract than that of Augustine (indeed, asked by this author what her notion of an internal world “looked like,” one individual asked, puzzled, “is it even possible for a person to imagine something concrete?”). Speaking of an inner world or of “withdrawing into oneself” in contemporary culture may be taken to mean clearing one’s mind, perhaps talking with oneself (as a single voice), solitarily remaining apart from the world, or not doing or imagining anything but rather sitting quietly and attempting not to notice any incoming stimuli. In this modern view, even imaginative daydreams are often seen as passive, and, it seems, would not be categorized as part of one’s inner world.

For paracosmists and others who actively create vivid mental spaces, as well as those who do not, the study of inner worlds may bear great fruit. Beginning with an appreciation for a literature developed before the advent of the Scientific Method, and using the excitement and questions that it may generate, we may learn new and valuable principles about human development and imagination using a methodology of empiricism that has heretofore been little or not at all directly applied to the claims of their antique traditions.

The methodology of the Arts has sparked and established a rich dialogue on these topics. States Joseph Campbell (26-7): “[The tales of the Garden of Eden and Noah] are not historical. That much is clear. They speak, therefore, not of outside events but of themes of the imagination. And since they exhibit features that are actually universal, they must in some way represent features of our general racial imagination, permanent features of the human spirit — or, as we say today, of the psyche….Taken as referring not to any geographical scene, but to a landscape of the soul, that Garden of Eden would have to be within us. Yet our conscious minds are unable to enter it and enjoy there the taste of eternal life, since we have already tasted of the knowledge of good and evil….That would seem to be the meaning of the myth when read, not as prehistory, but as referring to man’s inward spiritual state.” For the Sciences to join in this dialogue, to take as points of inspiration what has been said during its extant course, and to contribute in unique ways to its progression, inquiry may be sparked, stronger science built, and new lessons learned.

Aristotle. “On Memory.” The Complete Works of Aristotle. Ed. Jonathan Barnes. Trans. Beare, J. I. Princeton, NJ, U.S.A.: Princeton University Press, 1984. 714-720.

Augustine. “Book X.8-28.” Confessions. Trans. William Watts. London: Harvard University Press, 2000. 93-146.

Campbell, Joseph. Myths to Live By. London: Souvenir Press, 1972.

Carruthers, Mary. The Book of Memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Please see the links at the top of this page for more information and categories of posts.

This website is a collection of inspirations from a variety of media, as well as hypothesizing and reporting of findings from scientific inquiry into the development and phenomena of the imagination. This site is constantly in progress, and will be updated often. Please visit frequently, and contribute any thoughts you care to.

Contact: