A Question About Memory Recall

I have not been silent about the utter cruciality of memory to the acquisition and preservation of human knowledge [1].  I truly wish more philosophers, scientists, and theologians publicly addressed the issue of how memory relates to epistemology.  If memory does not function, then knowledge of most things becomes impossible.  From this, it follows that the question can be asked: if something is stored in your mind but you do not recall it accurately or cannot recall it at all, do you truly know it?

Inability to recall information stored in the memory does not in any way signify a deficiency in the storage of memory, only in its retrieval.  By the way, the idea that my memory stores vast quantities of information about past events that I will never actually recall or become aware of during my life is not one to toss into the category of impossible ideas.  It is entirely possible that our memories keep a perfect record of our entire waking experiences and that we simply do not have the capacity to glimpse the entirety of our memories.  Perhaps my subconscious (any potential part of my mind I am not consciously aware of) remembers with perfect clarity everything I focused on from every day of my life from my birth until today.  I can neither prove or disprove such a hypothetical and so I place it alongside other unverifiable and unfalsifiable ideas like the simulation hypothesis or multiverse.  Thus, the distinction between a stored memory and one that a person can retrieve becomes clear--just because a person does not consciously remember a fact or event does not mean that it is not in that person's memory at all.

If someone has information stored that cannot be retrieved, the answer to the question as to whether or not he or she actually knows the information is nuanced but not very complex.  It depends on what is meant by the word know.  Such a person does not know the information in any way that will impact his or her life or conscious reflection, but it remains true that the information is objectively held within the subconscious.  It is as if the person knows and does not know the information--but not in a way that is logically contradictory.

If memory recall did not work almost all the time, I would be incapable of functioning.  Some things I recall on a continual basis.  Others, I may know, but not in any immediate sense.  If my memory holds recollection of events that my conscious mind is unaware of, it is as if I have no knowledge whatsoever about the matter, even though in another sense I do.  I placed the "perfect memory" hypothesis alongside the simulation hypothesis and multiverse not only because they all are unverifiable and unfalsifiable, but because their veracity or falsity does not affect my life and does not affect necessary truths in any way.  In this case, whether my perfect memory hypothesis is true or not, 1) I still have a memory, 2) my memory is still largely reliable, and 3) my conscious mind still has access to a great deal of information.  And that is all I need to have absolute certainty about those specific facets of my memory.


[1].  See here:
A.  https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-reliability-of-memory.html
B.  https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/04/circular-reasoning-and-use-of-memory.html
C.  https://thechristianrationalist.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-cruciality-of-memory.html