Age of your earliest confirmed memory

[iguana_tonante]

Do you even bother to read my posts? You don't, do you? You just read enough to make up your little mind, ignore the rest and then you come on and act like you know everything.

I don't know everything. But I know... many things. Included how people works. Stop getting your knickers in a twist, admit you were wrong, and then we could talk like adults.

First of all, you just say it's impossible, without explaining how my mother could also have a memory of it when I had never told her.

She was wrong. Easy.

Secondly, You COMPLETELY ignore the part where I freely admitted that I could be wrong about my age, because all I had to go on for that was my mother's claim. Maybe it happened as I described, except I was six months old. I have no idea how old I was, and I stated REPEATEDLY that my claim about my age at the time was based solely on what my mother told me.

There is no "maybe", "could", "not sure".

But no, you never read that, did you? You made up your mind before you read the whole thing and ignored everything else.

Your acrimony is entirely inappropriate. You made a mistake. No biggies, except you got all outraged when your error was pointed out at you. You should learn how to deal with criticism.

 

[thestrangequark]

First of all, you just say it's impossible, without explaining how my mother could also have a memory of it when I had never told her.

It's extremely common for parents of male babies to get peed on that way. In fact, I remember at parenting class they specifically recommended having a towel nearby just in case.

So, assuming that you are a male, it's extremely likely that your parents would have a memory of such an event because that event was likely to happen and multiple times.

I can buy that the situation as you described it could have happened at some point. I don't know what age at which the require language and planning facilities develop though. I would think around 18 months at the earliest, but I'm not an expert.

Maybe our resident expert TSQ knows?

Mr Awe

Addressing the development of language: There are a few different theories as to how language develops, but they all agree that it starts very early on...like, pretty much immediately upon birth, or even before birth depending on how much one adheres to versions of the nativist theory or interactionist perspective, both of which consider language as at least partially innate. There is mounting evidence to support the innateness of language. My stance is that, like any other aspect of human psychology, language development is a combination of nature and nurture.

Phonological development begins at birth. Infants are physically incapable of actual speech because of the anatomy of their mouths (the soft palate is closer to the epiglottis, which is why they are obligate nose breathers), but they do start to babble and there is plenty of evidence that they recognize the sound of their native language (this is not the same as understanding language). Babies younger than a year can recognize a handful of familiar words, and begin to use some gestures, and by several months to 1 year of age they do begin to comprehend simple language, however, recognition of correct pronunciation of familiar words doesn't really occur until 1-2, suggesting that the depth of their recognition is limited.

Babies go through an intense vocabulary development phase between about 18-24 months, during which their vocabulary grows to several hundred words, of all word types.
Grammatical development doesn't really start until 1-2. There is plenty of evidence that grammar is innate (I can go into that more if anyone is interested), however it begins to be employed between 1 and 2 years of age.

Even though babies understand more language than they are able to employ, a baby of 6 weeks would definitively not understand the remark Tiberus' father made even at the literal level. As for comprehension of why the remark was humorous, that wouldn't happen until much, much later. I don't have any experimental or definitive evidence to cite, but I spent 5 years working with children, primarily on language development, and I'd guess that a kid would have to be at least 3 or 4 before he understood why the remark was funny, and even that would be a stretch.

As for planning ahead, children under the age of 5 have a very limited concept of the future.

As to the point about the mother...Just because the mother confirmed she had a memory of the event doesn't mean it happened when and how she remembers it. Adults' memories are as flawed as kids'. As someone mentioned, kids pee on their parents all the time, this likely happened more than once at different ages, and the mother was remembering a different time.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Not long after I was born, my parents moved to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, as my dad was pursuing his PhD in math down there. Occasionally, we would go down to the beach and I distinctly remember the waves crashing quite loudly there and being scared out of my mind from the noise. I was probably around 2 at the time. Definitely my earliest memory. My parents later confirmed the memory and showed me old photos of when we were there.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

A great example of this is saccadic masking, which results in the fact that we spend up to 40 minutes of every day blind: our eyes move more quickly than our brains can process (if we actually registered and "saw" the movement it would be debilitatingly nauseating). This means that for a few seconds or fractions of a second every minute or so, you are not processing visual cues. You don't notice this though, because your brain fills in the gaps to make things more pleasant for you.

I almost find myself wondering if that saccadic masking system you describe doesn't occur in people with certain disorders. Sensory integration disorder and certain forms of autism come to mind (and of course those two are often comorbid)--that does seem like it could create the horribly disorienting world that some people with those diagnoses experience.


About the innateness of language and music...at least personally, I doubt it's a coincidence that my musical tastes turned out to match certain concerts that my mom attended when she was pregnant with me. I can't remember that, of course, but in multiple cases, I fell instantly in love with the music in question upon hearing it for the first time (4 or 5 years old for one piece, 11 for another), and it resonated very deeply with me.

I would expect language to be innate, given the role we've seen the human version of FOXP2 and other genes play in our development.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

It totally still weirds me out. A similar experience I've had is memories of TV shows I watched as a kid being in color, when in fact the shows in question were only ever produced and shown in black and white: my brain filled in the colors for me. It's amazing how much strangeness there is to be found in our memories if we really pay attention.

I've found this discussion extremely interesting. I frequently find myself misremembering scenes in films, lines in books, etc, and being rather surprised to find that the reality doesn't match the memory. In one (if you'll excuse the word) "memorable" case, I found that I'd inserted several whole lines of dialogue into an animated film. The scene features a character making a string of loosely connected statements as part of a report, and my childish brain had apparently decided to string them together into something more coherent by creating "missing" dialogue. All entirely appropriate to the character and to the tone of the scene, naturally. I was so certain my added lines were part of the film I searched the internet at length for evidence of alternate/edited video releases before finally concluding that I'd made it up.

In all such cases, I tend to prefer my version over the original, so I suppose I misremember things in order to make them more appealing. Apparently, I'm a critic by nature, arrogantly taking others' work and inserting my own finishing touches. "I'll accept your masterpiece, but only if I can clean it up a little. Deary me, this dialogue could use some tweaking".

It's fascinating to realize that I wasn't merely watching these films as a small boy, but playing with them, too; engaging with them as an outlet for my own creativity or using them to boost my understanding of social interaction.

 

[captcalhoun]

George Lucas, is that you?

 

[Mr Awe]

Maybe our resident expert TSQ knows?

Addressing the development of language . . ..

That's all very interesting information. It sounds like the earliest the incident that Tiberius describes could've happen would've been between 3-5 years of age. Probably closer to 5. The main hangups being the understanding of the humor and the planning ability.

That's of course assuming that it's a true memory and we're just trying to figure out when it could've happened. I'm growing wary of all early memories now!

Mr Awe

 

[thestrangequark]

^Memories are fickle things, that's for sure.

As for Tiberus' memory, there's no way to be certain whether or not any aspect of it is real. Urinating on his father could be a real memory from somewhere between 1 or 2...maybe a few months younger, and then that memory could have been embellished over the next few years.

 

[Tiberius]

How do you know that you didn't hear, but not remember, your mother talking about it when you were two or three years old and that the image came into your mind then?

Possible, I grant you, but since we lived alone, why would she tell me about it?

It still seems to me that the simplest explanation is that I remember an actual event and my mother simply got my age wrong.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Even if you lived alone surely you had visits from other people such as your mother's family or friends? Or maybe you visit other people with her when you were a young child? I am sure she had many conversation with other people when you were with her.

 

[Tiberius]

^You made up the idea of wanting to repeat it and incorporated it into your memory. As I said, memories are synthesized, that means your synthesized thoughts can easily become a part of them, just like you can remember anything else you thought, imagined, or dreamt. I know it's hard to take in when a memory feels real, but that memory is false. If you were a year, a year and a half, then it might be credible, but at a few weeks? No way.

I'f you're interested in reading about how memories are formed, I'd highly recommend any of Steven Pinker's books. He is a neurologist and linguist at Harvard and has written some very interesting and engaging books on the subject.

You seem very sure about this. How have you determined that the memory didn't happen as I remember it and I was simply older than my mother said?

 

[Tiberius]

Oops.

 

[Tiberius]

And, I thought an analogy might make my point a little clearer as to why I am so certain Tiberius' memory is artificial: someone claiming that he can remember comprehending language and metaphor, and that he had the ability to make a plan and attempt to carry it through at only a few weeks (or even months) of age, is analogous to one claiming he could not only walk, but hop, skip, and jump at that age.

Your disbelief requires that my mother's claim that I was only six weeks old at the time is accurate.

Let me ask you this, if she had said I was six months, nine months or a year old at the time, would you find my claim so hard to believe?

 

[Tiberius]

So how about you don't make impossible allegations and then get angry when they get questioned? You know the meaning of impossible, right? It means that, whatever you remember, whatever your mother said, whatever the circumstances, it could not have happened.

At six weeks, the human brain is completely, totally, unquestionably incapable of understanding language, metaphors, and to plan any action beside "crying to get attention". If you "remembered" flying out of your crib and around the house at six weeks, and you mother distractedly confirmed it in a off-hand conversation, would you believe it's a real memory? Because there are about the same possibility of your memory being real as you being "Tiberius, the Amazing Flying Baby".

Now, one year or so... maybe. But six weeks? No.

The only thing that is getting me angry about this is that you all seem to have decided that the entire memory I have is completely fictitious.

I have freely admitted that my mother's claim about how old I am is most likely wrong, and yet no one seems to say, "Well, Tiberius has such and such memory, but it couldn't have happened at six weeks old, so he must have been older." Everyone is saying that since it couldn't have happened at six weeks old, it couldn't have happened at all!

it is entirely plausible that the memory I have is real, and happened when I was a good deal older, but no one seems willing to accept that. Instead, you have just arbitrarily claimed that the whole thing is false because of a single inconsistency in it that comes from my mother and not from me!

 

[Tiberius]

I'm not playing Psychologist, Tiberius. One of my degrees is in psychology. My other is in childhood special education (which includes intense focus on brain development). Both are from NYU, one of the top universities in the country. My concentrations were in neurological development and learning disorders (which means I spent a lot of time learning about human memory). I know what I am talking about, and, as I said before, your claim is just as credible as if I claimed to be doing cartwheels at 2 months old.

My "stop playing psychologist" remark was direct at Finn, not you, and it was in response to the reaction that since it couldn't have happened at the age I was told, then it must be completely false.

If you have degrees in the area, I accept your word as an expert (at least expert compared to me), and even though I was completely unaware that a child that young would be completely incapable of picking up any understanding of English, I have learned that now, and I'm aware that the memory could not have happened at the age my mother told me it did.

 

[Lord Garth]

Though I said my earliest memories were when I was 3, they were just flashes. I can use context I now know to place when those memories had to be. 4 is the same, although there was slightly more to the flashes.

At 5, I could remember moments but not anything anyone said. 6 is the first time I can remember incidents and anything that was said during those incidents. That's when my first full memories are from.

I always thought my situation was the norm. I'm surprised there are people who remember things as early as I've seen in this thread.

 

[Gul Re'jal]

^I feel the same way. I'm astonished seeing people describing things that happened to them at such early ages and, to be honest, I am quite sceptical. I am certain that they all believe it to be true, but I'm not sure if those are "hard facts." Some people could remember things from really early childhood, sure, but...that many?

 

[Data Holmes]

^I feel the same way. I'm astonished seeing people describing things that happened to them at such early ages and, to be honest, I am quite sceptical. I am certain that they all believe it to be true, but I'm not sure if those are "hard facts." Some people could remember things from really early childhood, sure, but...that many?

Well, technically speaking, every experience from the point the brain stats to function is cataloged in memory. It's just a question of wether we can consciously access the memories in question or not, not wether they actually are there.


I have a question, for the people who have sub 3 memories. Have you or do you experience lucid dreaming?

 

[captcalhoun]

nope.

 

[thestrangequark]

I'm not playing Psychologist, Tiberius. One of my degrees is in psychology. My other is in childhood special education (which includes intense focus on brain development). Both are from NYU, one of the top universities in the country. My concentrations were in neurological development and learning disorders (which means I spent a lot of time learning about human memory). I know what I am talking about, and, as I said before, your claim is just as credible as if I claimed to be doing cartwheels at 2 months old.

My "stop playing psychologist" remark was direct at Finn, not you, and it was in response to the reaction that since it couldn't have happened at the age I was told, then it must be completely false.

Sorry about that, I thought it was aimed at me.

If you have degrees in the area, I accept your word as an expert (at least expert compared to me), and even though I was completely unaware that a child that young would be completely incapable of picking up any understanding of English, I have learned that now, and I'm aware that the memory could not have happened at the age my mother told me it did.

I read this last night but was way too hammered to respond (ah...martini, the enemy of reason!). I just have to say how awesome this is, Tiberius. I don't think I've EVER had a debate here in which another person had the intellectual honesty to concede a point when presented with evidence. Usually they just stop posting in the thread. I never get that. If I'm wrong and some one shows me I'm wrong than I acknowledge it and move on. Anyway, you are awesome.

And to the question you asked in the other post, if your mother had said 6 or 9 months, your memory would be more likely to be true. You probably would have had enough language to comprehend what your dad said, though not the ability to understand why it was funny. What you thought was funny was more likely his physical reaction. Also, I'd still be very doubtful of the part about planning to do it again.

It's been shown that infants actually have very good memories, and no one's really sure why people have infantile amnesia. So, while it is extremely rare, it's possible to have a few memories from that early on.

^I feel the same way. I'm astonished seeing people describing things that happened to them at such early ages and, to be honest, I am quite sceptical. I am certain that they all believe it to be true, but I'm not sure if those are "hard facts." Some people could remember things from really early childhood, sure, but...that many?

Well, technically speaking, every experience from the point the brain stats to function is cataloged in memory. It's just a question of wether we can consciously access the memories in question or not, not wether they actually are there.

This isn't actually how it works at all.

Our brains don't work like computers, and we don't have a memory file. Much of what the brain processes, consciously or subconscious, is forgotten. And I don't mean buried or stored away, but completely gone.

Your brain isn't even processing and recording everything that you're experiencing right now...it's selecting what's worth processing and blocking the unimportant stimuli.

I have a question, for the people who have sub 3 memories. Have you or do you experience lucid dreaming?

My memories start around the age of 2, and I have a lot of memories from early childhood. I've experienced lucid dreaming twice (that I recall). Why do you ask?