My Research Story

 I will now briefly explain how I transitioned from NT chronology to memory science.

 I bought the Oxford Classical Dictionary, followed its footnotes on the Hellenistic and early imperial eras, wrote my own chronology of the first century CE, and sought feedback from scholars of the New Testament. I then began to discover (1) that NT scholars generally do not think like historians, and (2) that timelines do not cohere strongly in most people’s minds. 

 I began to consider that informational overload was at least one impediment to my progress. At about that same time, Anthony LeDonne introduced me to cognitive memory studies. My old desire to write down a comprehensive account of the first century soon gave way to a new goal: how can I convey this information so that it sticks? What do I need to do to write differently so that readers will be able to remember all this chronological detail? 

 Since then, I did this. Two years later, I also did this. I’m currently working to make this research suitable for publication. 

 As I have said here before, my basic finding is that some types of information effectively imply their own temporal sequence during acts of constructive remembering. Most prominent among these kinds of “temporal information” are (A) causality, (B) movement & location, and (C) disruption of perceived equilibria. Part of my work involves demonstrating that these informational types also happen to underscore narrative theory about plot, setting, and conflict (respectively). 

 We have long known that stories enhance memory while distorting reality. My hope is that science can guide us towards more responsible and ethical management of ‘storying’ dynamics. 

 If anyone is interested in helping me in any way, that would be wonderful. 

 Anon, then…