1. Did he have a _record_ of the name in his mind? 2. How many ways are there of helping the memory? 3. What is the first way? 4. The second? 5. What is meant by Memory Training? 6. What is the unique character of my system? 7. What is the result of its use? 8. In how many ways does my system operate as a Trainer? 9. What are they?
A one-sided view of the Memory proclaims that if vivid First Impressions are made in all cases, that is enough. This opinion implies a limited acquaintance with the different kind of memories. In some cases where a person is troubled with chronic forgetfulness, a vivid First Impression may be received, and no recollection of it will long survive. That a vivid impression was received is proved by the fact that, shortly after the occurrence, his memory of the details of it is possibly nearly perfect, and yet, after the lapse of a few days, or weeks, or months, the recollection of every trace of the occurrence has vanished. After the total oblivion of the matter in his waking moments, he will sometimes recall all the details of the affair in a dream. This is demonstration irresistible that the trouble in this case lies, not in receiving vivid First Impressions, but in the weakness of his reviving power. In fact, some memories are much oftener weak from deficiency in reviving power than from feebleness of first impressions. If, however, Impressionability be increased to the highest degree in all cases, and Revivability be strengthened to the same extent, all memories will be good, however bad some of them may theretofore have been in any or in all respects.
RECOLLECTIVE ANALYSIS is used to memorise a series of words or facts between every pair of which the relation of In., Ex., or Con. exists. It equally applies to a single pair of such words or facts.
RECOLLECTIVE SYNTHESIS OR THOUGHTIVE UNIFICATION is used where _no relation exists_.
A _revivable_ connection is established in such cases by means of a Correlation which always consists of one or more unifying intermediates. And the words, hitherto un-united, which are thus cemented together, are called Extremes.
We had experience in learning the Series in the first chapter that the application of the Laws of In., Ex., and Con. enable us to memorise those Series in much less time than it would have taken had we not known _how to make use of_ those Laws. Many people could _never_ have committed to memory such Series by mere _rote_ or _repetition_, and not one in a hundred could have learnt to say them backwards by _rote_ alone. Yet my Pupils easily learn them both ways, because Analysis affords the highest possible AID to the Natural Memory. In fact, the _deepest_ and _most abiding_ impression that can be made upon the Natural Memory is by impressing it with _relations_ of In., Ex., or Con.; because these are the Memory-Senses (if the phrase be allowed), these are the Eyes, Ears, Touch, Taste, and Smell of the Memory: and we have only to impress the _Memory_ according to the laws of its own nature and the _Memory_ will RETAIN the impression. This is exactly what my Art does: for I translate every case of Synthesis into an Analytic series by supplying one or more _Memory-intermediates_ that grow out of the "Extremes," each one of which is an instance of In., Ex., or Con.--Thus, every example of Synthesis is a =developed or extended Analysis=. To make this translation from Synthesis into Analysis requires no intellectual ingenuity--no constructive power of imagination--but only a _recall to consciousness_, through In., Ex., or Con., of what we already _know_ about the "Extremes." I call a specimen of developed Analysis a Correlation, because the Intermediates sustain the _direct_, _immediate_, and _specific_ relation of In., Ex., or Con. to the "Extremes" (having nothing in common, in principle or nature, with the old-fashioned Mnemonical "Links," or "Phrases").