You might remember event X. And you might think of it as your “earliest memory.” Actually, it was later in time than event Y, which you remember just as vividly. Because time-sequence-ordering gets jumbled that far back.
Also,
Is it the real memory you have or are you just remembering that you had that memory.
I mean, how much has your activity of remembering, time and again, influenced the actual memory, or created a new one?
Nobody knows how memory works exactly. Obviously, it’s some function of that bag of chemicals we call a brain. We’ll find out the exact mechanism some day. It’s not really very important though. we know all sorts of ways that memory can work with non-biological bags of chemicals. The distinction will be interesting, but unimportant in the particulars. Finding the details may be important if it allows us better memories, but the details themselves won’t be important.
Or they confirm it because they’re actually the ones that remembered it and retelling of the story has made you think you remember it (“source-monitoring error” although there is are many possibilities for inaccurate memories). Memories are notoriously unreliable.
There are lots of possibilities, including that your memory is correct. If it really was a rather mundane memory, then it makes no sense that you would all remember it plus they would be able to confirm the minor details accurately.
From what I know about existing studies and science, remembering any event that happened when you were 12 months old would put you in a minority small enough to make the accuracy of your memory questionable. However, what I know about the science is admittedly not a lot.
Another facet of memory implicated by the data we have is that it’s a creative process.
A set of experiences get combined in your brain to re-create the memory. Tests have shown this creative process to be susceptible to “editing”. The mood your in, suggestions by others, current events, etc, all can play a role in how the memory is re-created.
Paradoxically then, the more you recall a memory, the less likely it is to be accurate, because there will have been more opportunities for other things to change it slightly.
That’s not what I am talking about. I’m talking about *forgetting *your earliest memory. Your next earliest memory then becomes your first, as far as you know. Actually, since you have forgotten the first one, it is in fact your first memory. Unless you are somehow saying that you can forget something and remember it at the same time.
It’s not clear whether or not we can have memories that we can’t seem to remember, but are actually still there. It’s also not clear if a memory is the same thing at a very early age as it is later as the brain develops in the first few months of life. But I agree that your first memory generally refers to the first thing you can remember.
My first memory is very mundane–I’m lying on the kitchen table looking at the overhead light. I looked down and see my mother changing my diaper. I look over and see my sister on the kitchen chair. I see the wallpaper–blood red background, with broken whie eggs and yellow chickens on it.
I told my mother this memory years later, and she said that we did live in a place with that wallpaper in the kitchen, but move when I was 19 months old because she was pregnant with my younger sister.
I can envision that wallpaper.