Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-frp75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T07:58:17.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stable Engrams and Neural Dynamics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Sarah K. Robins
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The idea that remembering involves an engram, becoming stable and permanent via consolidation, has guided the neuroscience of memory since its inception. The shift to thinking of memory as continuous and dynamic, as part of a trend toward neural dynamics, has challenged this commitment, with some, such as Lynn Nadel, calling for “the demise of the fixed trace” and others, such as Alcino J. Silva, urging rejection of the “consolidation dogma.” Does consideration of neural dynamics offer reasons to reject engram theory? No. I argue that they are compatible. At most, shifting to a dynamic view of neural processes compels revision of the implementational details.

Information

Type
Cognitive Sciences
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 87 , Issue 5: PSA 2018 - Proceedings of the 2018 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II Symposia Papers , December 2020 , pp. 1130 - 1139
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

Many thanks to Felipe De Brigard and Colin Klein for organizing the PSA 2018 symposium Neural Dynamics and Cognitive Ontology, where this article was originally presented. Thanks, too, for comments and feedback from the audience and from my fellow symposium participants: Jessica Cohen, Felipe De Brigard, Bryce Gessell, and Colin Klein.

References

Bartlett, Frederick. 1932. Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bliss, T. V., and L⊘mo, T.. 1973. “Long-Lasting Potentiation of Synaptic Transmission in the Dentate Area of the Anesthetized Rabbit following Stimulation of the Performant Path.” Journal of Physiology 232:331–56.Google Scholar
Burnston, Daniel C. 2017. “Interface Problems in the Explanation of Action.” Philosophical Explorations 20:242–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chialvo, Dante R. 2010. “Emergent Complex Neural Dynamics.” Nature Physics 6:744–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craver, Carl F. 2003. “The Making of a Memory Mechanism.” Journal of the History of Biology 36:153–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Brigard, Felipe. 2014. “Is Memory for Remembering? Recollection as a Form of Episodic Hypothetical Thinking.” Synthese 191:155–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Brigard, Felipe. 2017. “Cognitive Systems and the Changing Brain.” Philosophical Explorations 20:224–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudai, Yadin. 2012. “The Restless Engram: Consolidations Never End.” Annual Review of Neuroscience 35:227–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eisenberg, M., Kobilo, T., Berman, D. E., and Dudai, Y.. 2003. “Stability of Retrieved Memory: Inverse Correlation with Trace Dominance.” Science 301:1102–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hebb, Donald. 1949. The Organization of Behavior: A Neuropsychological Theory. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
Josselyn, Sheena A., Köhler, Stefan, and Frankland, Paul W.. 2015. “Finding the Engram.” Nature Reviews Neuroscience 16:521–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaplan, David, and Craver, Carl F.. 2011. “The Explanatory Force of Dynamical and Mathematical Models in Neuroscience.” Philosophy of Science 78:601–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. J. 1979. “Psychobiology of Active and Inactive Memory.” Psychological Bulletin 86:1054–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nadel, L. 2007. “Consolidation: The Demise of the Fixed Trace.” In Science of Memory Concepts, ed. Roediger, H. L., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. M., 177–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nadel, L., Winocur, G., Ryan, L., and Moscovitch, M.. 2007. “Systems Consolidation and Hippocampus: Two Views.” Debates in Neuroscience 1:55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nader, K., Schafe, G. E., and LeDoux, J. E.. 2000. “Fear Memories Require Protein Synthesis in the Amygdala for Reconsolidation after Retrieval.” Nature 406:722–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poldrack, Russ, et al. 2015. “Long-Term Neural and Physiological Phenotyping of a Single Human.” Nature Communications 6:1–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quintilian. 1921. Institutio Oratoria. London: Loeb Classic.Google Scholar
Ribot, T. A. 1882/1977. Diseases of Memory. Washington, DC: University.Google Scholar
Robins, Sarah K. 2017. “Memory Traces.” In Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Memory, ed. Bernecker, S. and Michaelian, K., 76–87. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sara, S. J. 2000. “Retrieval and Reconsolidation: Toward a Neurobiology of Remembering.” Learning and Memory 7:73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., Hassabis, D., Martin, V. C., Spreng, R. N., and Szpunar, K. K.. 2012. “The Future of Memory: Remembering, Imagining, and the Brain.” Neuron 76:677–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scoville, W. B., and Milner, B.. 1957. “Loss of Recent Memory after Bilateral Hippocampal Lesions.” Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 20:11–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Semon, R. 1921. The Mneme. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Silva, A. J. 2007. “Consolidation: Molecular Restlessness.” In Science of Memory Concepts, ed. Roediger, H. L., Dudai, Y., and Fitzpatrick, S. M., 167–70. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar