What do you think?
Rate this book
Marking the Mind: A History Of Memory
Memory is one of the few psychological concepts with a truly ancient lineage. Presenting a history of the interrelated changes in memory tasks, memory technology and ideas about memory from antiquity to the late twentieth century, this book confronts psychology's 'short present' with its 'long past'. Kurt Danziger, one of the most influential historians of psychology of recent times, traces long-term continuities from ancient mnemonics and tools of inscription to modern memory experiments and computer storage. He explores historical discontinuities, showing how different kinds of memory became prominent at different times, and examines these changes in the context of specific themes including the question of truth in memory, distinctions between kinds of memory, the project of memory experimentation and the physical localization and conceptual location of memory. Daniziger's unique approach provides a historical perspective for understanding varieties of reproduction, narratives of the self and short-term memory.
314 pages, Paperback
First published September 25, 2008
3 people are currently reading
71 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
April 29, 2014
This is a fascinating and overall well-written history of various ideas of memory and memory arts throughout western history, connected with "modern" psychological theory still surprisingly based on some very old concepts. Worth reading.
October 27, 2020
Interesting undertaking to analyze the history of the way memory has been understood and studied historically, going back to the ancients. Unfortunately, as with many attempts to critique scientific undertakings, this work makes liberal use of terms by intentionally re-defining them to make a point, such as referring to things like file cabinets as "external memory." This has the effect of obfuscation with regards to the language used in writing about the concepts being presented, thereby giving some level of false credence to the idea that a file cabinet is somehow "memory" just as whatever happens in the mind/brain is also memory. This allows for seemingly legitimate attacks on the way so-called reductive and "positivist" science is utilized in the study of memory. Aside from fascinating recounting of the historical contexts of how memory was regarded, I found the point being made to be tired and outdated and ultimately unsupported.
I also took issue with statements like "It certainly does not look as though the organization of external memory required only the projection of an organization already established in the human brain. If that had been the case, one would have expected far more rapid advances in the organization of external memory than are observed in human history. The slow rate of progress suggests rather a co-evolution of external memory and the corresponding cognitive functions." (Location 104 of 5004 in the Kindle edition.) This is essentially a meaningless statement. Here's why: How does the author know that the development of this "organization of external memory" wasn't rapid? Maybe it happened at the most "rapid" rate possible because it WAS a projection of an organization already established in the human brain.
By the way, I'm not saying that "reductive" and "positivist" science are the ultimate way to study memory. Indeed, when one considers recent ideas in complexity as applied to the brain (and, hence, the mind), it cannot be denied the this approach has its limitations, but it is also an indispensable process in the science of psychology. Danziger doesn't deny that, but I think he is overemphasizing those limitations.
I also took issue with statements like "It certainly does not look as though the organization of external memory required only the projection of an organization already established in the human brain. If that had been the case, one would have expected far more rapid advances in the organization of external memory than are observed in human history. The slow rate of progress suggests rather a co-evolution of external memory and the corresponding cognitive functions." (Location 104 of 5004 in the Kindle edition.) This is essentially a meaningless statement. Here's why: How does the author know that the development of this "organization of external memory" wasn't rapid? Maybe it happened at the most "rapid" rate possible because it WAS a projection of an organization already established in the human brain.
By the way, I'm not saying that "reductive" and "positivist" science are the ultimate way to study memory. Indeed, when one considers recent ideas in complexity as applied to the brain (and, hence, the mind), it cannot be denied the this approach has its limitations, but it is also an indispensable process in the science of psychology. Danziger doesn't deny that, but I think he is overemphasizing those limitations.
September 1, 2017
A powerful piece of scholarship.
With all his references and pages of notes at the end of each chapter, the author shows how the idea of memory has evolved from the time of Plato to the late twentieth century, covering the historical shift of wide-ranging topics: the metaphor of memory, the use of mnemonics, memory as knowledge, memory in psychological science, categorization of memory, memory and truth, the localization of memory and memory in relation to other mental constructs.
As in other respected historical works, any substantial development is followed by clear presentation of socio-economic factors and insightful commentary. These comments often demonstrate a nuanced, sophisticated understanding of the history of psychological concepts, as in the section "The memory which is short", where the author described how the concept of short-term memory was linked to the beginning of compulsory education and what that might mean for the educational use of memory studies. The history and politics of mental trauma is another example, so is the focus of psychologists on memorization.
With all his references and pages of notes at the end of each chapter, the author shows how the idea of memory has evolved from the time of Plato to the late twentieth century, covering the historical shift of wide-ranging topics: the metaphor of memory, the use of mnemonics, memory as knowledge, memory in psychological science, categorization of memory, memory and truth, the localization of memory and memory in relation to other mental constructs.
As in other respected historical works, any substantial development is followed by clear presentation of socio-economic factors and insightful commentary. These comments often demonstrate a nuanced, sophisticated understanding of the history of psychological concepts, as in the section "The memory which is short", where the author described how the concept of short-term memory was linked to the beginning of compulsory education and what that might mean for the educational use of memory studies. The history and politics of mental trauma is another example, so is the focus of psychologists on memorization.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews