A Memory Database For Good?

'How does the transformation of human memory to commodity affect our definition of "Human" (as this definition, you will recall, is receding as technology advances)?'

If society begins to accept the tenet that human memory is a commodity, then one might assume that the status of the human or individual would rise, as now he is in control of an organism with distinct societal or social value. However, with the introduction of such an idea as "memory implantation," the commodity seems to easily "outvalue" the human, even though it is the human who has invented, or created, the commodity. This seems to link directly back to the idea of technology devaluing the human, where human creates machines with an ability more astute than he himself could ever be. As mentioned once in class, the idea of a prosthetic leg made especially for former runners fits the bill - the prosthetic is certainly a machine, and it has been engineered to be "better" or perhaps more "appropriate" for a certain action than the human leg itself, thus devaluing the human leg for the purpose of running and exalting this new technology created from human knowledge that actually surpasses human ability.

In her post, Katie talks about the streaming, ever-changing, personalized, and individually interpreted nature of memory and the problems that such a perceptual economy creates. However, wouldn't it be possible to somehow alter the way memory implantation works so as to ensure that the new memory an individual experiences is not internalized in the way his or her own memory would be? We talked a lot in class about how "experiencing" someone else's memory could be detrimental - for example, it would certainly be somewhat traumatic to "experience" a veteran's memories of a horrific war, or a murderer's "experience" of homicide. But what if we could make "memory implantation" or "swapping" more like watching a movie of somebody else's tactile, emotional, and bodily experience? Couldn't "experiencing" someone else's memory be more like watching a first-person video game that could be "experienced" or felt, but kept entirely separate from the user's memory as his or her own human experience? What if we could experience someone else’s memory while simultaneously creating our own perception or opinion about it? What if we could catalogue the memories we experienced, and keep a sort of archive of our own first person experience and that of others, or experiences we've swapped or downloaded? Furthermore, would this sort of separation be enough to alter the identity problem that "memory swapping" seemed to create in the first place? What about some sort of governmental or authoritarian control of the "memory database"? Obviously, this could implicate some very real and tremendous political, corruption, and control issues, but in theory, couldn't it be implemented?

Couldn’t we also create a database for a specific use to help eradicate the “negative” use of such a tool? What if the database was only for a specific cause, where “disturbing” or R-rated memories could almost be almost eradicated? For example, a scholarly database might be available for users to swap and download memories related only directly to academia, where you might choose to see someone else’s memory of sitting in a biology lecture in high school or having a lively discussion with an English professor at university? These “memories,” then, would be more like little movies or vignettes of another’s life than true “memories” fraught with emotion or trauma. It would still be a new way of communicating, however, because a first person "memory" of an event will always be more immediate and personal than a movie, especially considering the synesthetic quality of experience and the intensification the senses would bring to the experience of the memory.

If “memory implantation” could be “experienced” as above, where it was easy to distinguish first person experience from an outside, first person memory, wouldn’t it be both beneficial for the growth of humankind and a way to maintain at least some semblance of individual identity? If there was a way to ensure that no man could effectively “experience” or download every memory available to him, and each person could use the memory database to download a particular memory he or she was interested in experiencing (I imagine that it would be categorized, so users interested in memories about playing with pets could easily navigate there, or users wanting to experience someone’s first love could find it, as well, through a sort of search engine or site map), doesn’t that almost amplify the individual? Now, not only does each person have his or her own set of memories, but those carefully picked out for him or herself on the basis of personal choice and interest?