Are our identities memory based?

[Stravo]

Total Recall and Blade Runner each dealt with identity and memory. The thesis is that who we are is essentially the synthesis of all our memories. That all our memories build up over time to give us a sense of "self" and that the person that you are is based solely on this.

For example if you are a murderous bastard say Hitler and you implanted in him the memory engrams (for lack of a better term) of a pacificist that he would then become a pacifist or at least a good person. There are no genes or inherent evil (or good) in anyone.

If Gandhi were given given Hitler's memory engrams then he would most likely have called for the extermination of muslims after India won its independence.

Do you think it is that simple or is who we are more than just a collection of memories? Is our identity actually something more, maybe you believe there is such a thing as inherent goodness and evil. Maybe Hitler was just a bad egg and maybe Gandhi was born to be good.

Any thoughts on this?

[Vendetta]

Yes. Part of what we are is defined by memory (though experience would probably be closer, because not everything that makes us is available for recall, which the term 'memory' connotes.)

It's not entirely that, of course. The whole nature/nurture thing misses a couple of important points. First that we are a product of both, and second that as conscious reasoning individuals we can choose to override both.

[Spacebeard]

Total Recall and Blade Runner each dealt with identity and memory. The thesis is that who we are is essentially the synthesis of all our memories. That all our memories build up over time to give us a sense of "self" and that the person that you are is based solely on this.

That's also a major theme in Ghost in the Shell, where we a man who has false memories of a family imprinted in his mind in order to motivate him to be a pawn in someone else's crime. He's completely fucked over, of course, because a major part of his identity consists of memories of people who turn out to be completely nonexistant.

For example if you are a murderous bastard say Hitler and you implanted in him the memory engrams (for lack of a better term) of a pacificist that he would then become a pacifist or at least a good person. There are no genes or inherent evil (or good) in anyone.

If Gandhi were given given Hitler's memory engrams then he would most likely have called for the extermination of muslims after India won its independence.

Do you think it is that simple or is who we are more than just a collection of memories? Is our identity actually something more, maybe you believe there is such a thing as inherent goodness and evil. Maybe Hitler was just a bad egg and maybe Gandhi was born to be good.

Any thoughts on this?

I certainly don't think I'll see an ultimate answer to the "nature vs. nurture" question in my lifetime. Of course, studies have indicated there may be genes that cause a predisposition towards certain kinds of behavior - risk taking, for example - but that their influence can certainly still be overridden by experience. If, hypothetically, the experiences of a man with highly risk-averse behavior were transplanted into the brain of a man with the risk-taking gene, I certainly don't think he'd suddenly take up sky-diving; his behavior would probably change only in situations where it's determined by immediate emotional reactions.

[Vendetta]

I don't think we can even talk about memory transfer as a hypothetical. Memory is based on the physical structure of neuron connections in the brain. Trying to rewire bits of it without accounting for how it connects to the rest would probably be messy.

[Admiral Valdemar]

I don't think we can even talk about memory transfer as a hypothetical. Memory is based on the physical structure of neuron connections in the brain. Trying to rewire bits of it without accounting for how it connects to the rest would probably be messy.

There is always the possibility of, for now, having hardware in the brain to work beside the organics and potentially be programmed for certain things e.g. able to learn things fast like in The Matrix. This could lead to maybe having a crime whereby it is hacked and false memories are planted, but for now, that, and the idea of rewiring synapses en masse, is not possible.

As it is though, we are only the sum of what experiences we have encountered. This is why you can become an entirely different person 10 years down the line, if only because of new memories forming and old ones being destroyed. Course, it could also be down to a parasite which can drastically alter mental wellbeing.

[Feil]

Intelligence, ability to deal well with groups, ability to learn or employ physical skills, sexual orientation, etc. form aspects of the self that are independant of memory.

Perhaps you could get a perfectly decent person to be an evil one by giving him someone else's memories.

But if he were straight, you probably wouldn't be able to get him to be turned on by another man. If his intelligence was on the wrong side of the bellcurve, you probably wouldn't be able to make him able to keep a job as a carier-out of scientific research.

[Dahak]

Well, there are cases of people who show completely different behaviour/personalities after strokes, for instance without widespread memory loss.

[Zero]

I know that if I swapped memories with someone, neither of us would be the same person simply in different bodies. Brain chemistry has something to do with it too. I'm bipolar, so in a more normal brain, the experience might be too different for my old memories to express themselves in the same manner. Different human brains do have different compositions and may function differently even if the same memories are implanted in two different people. IIRC, a lot of genetic diversity in humans relates to the human brain, so a memory transfer may not be the equivalent of a personality transfer.

[Jaepheth]

Dark City covered this exact topic.

However, our personalities are not determined (at least, entirely) by our memories.

The evidence for this is a case study in which a man suffered trauma to his brain (frontal lobe) and lived. As I recall, he remembered all the events in his life, but was soon fired from his job, and divorced from his wife because his personality had changed.

I'll try to dig up a source.

[Xuenay]

You have to define what you mean by "memory" here. The things we consciously recall only form part of a person's personality. The majority of systems in the brain will in one way or the other learn as part of their normal functioning. Our unique body language, way of speaking or how easily we get pissed off are all things that are governed by non-conscious memory systems. Note also that some cognitive scientists consider episodic memory (memory of things that happened to you) and semantic memory (knowledge of facts) to be two different things, though this has been criticized.

And if by "memory" you mean "all brain systems that learn", well, that's just about the whole brain then.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_memory , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarative_memory and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Episodic_memory for some starter articles.

[Majin Gojira]

My mother, a child/developmental psychologist with the local school district, has a really good analogy about this sort of thing.

A lot of people beat and abuse their dogs. But an abused beagle is going to behave differently than abused rotwiler.

[Srynerson]

However, our personalities are not determined (at least, entirely) by our memories.

The evidence for this is a case study in which a man suffered trauma to his brain (frontal lobe) and lived. As I recall, he remembered all the events in his life, but was soon fired from his job, and divorced from his wife because his personality had changed.

It's a different case, but Phineas Gage is the classic example given of personality changes resulting from brain damage: +http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage