I’m 30 years old and I want to know if I can still improve my memory at this age or I can only keep what I have already?
You can still improve your memory.
As far as I know, memory training is beneficial for all ages.
I am 50 years old as of the year 2020, and just lately I was able to memorise 74 digits in a single minute.
I believe the age is no barrier to improve memory no matter what age we are.
I have a far better memory than I had when I was 30 year old. This is simply because I have a well trained memory. I use memory techniques every single day, and it’s become a second nature to me now. And I find that the more I use it the better and faster I get with it.
Yes, we can still improve memory at any ages. Im 33, but the training i had since training 4 months ago made my memory better than when i was in highschool. I believe we can improve our memory. It’s just that we are aiming to be a memory champion already when what we need is to improve our memory first.
I’d bet you’re still young enough to improve.
You can improve at any age but that depends on how far you are from your genetic potential. If you were close to your genetic potential in your youth then as your potential ceiling decreases as you age and goes lower than your previous best scores you will never be able to achieve those scores again.
The only reason older people improve is because they are still below their performance ceiling for their age. But make no mistake, their potential ceiling is lower than it used to be.
What source says this?
It’s too basic for me to site a source. There are savants like Kim Peek, regular people like me, and people with low IQ’s. All of us are the way we are because of genetics. All of us have different capacity for memory.
What different techniques do you use?
I use the shaper system. They are number shapes from 0-9 and 00-99. I developed it further from the basic number shapes.
So there is no proof only belief because it seems obvious. There are many reasons why I would disagree, particularly with the statement:
The fact that this is not the case seems obvious for me.
We are all who we are as an influence of our genetics, environmental influences, and choices (if you believe in free will).
I don’t think it’s controversial that our ultimate limits are set by our genetics. Do you think someone with Down Syndrome is going to win the world memory championships? Do you think there is no theoretical limit to what the human brain is capable of performing in memory league? If there is, what sets that ultimate limit? I’m not sure what there is to disagree about.
I think that view is too simple.
For example earlier you stated
These two things are worlds apart in meaning and are still supposed to be the same point.
If I directly agreed
What makes you so sure that we are at 100%,99% or even 80% of our supposed genetic limit? The whole of humanity might as well be sitting at their 1% complaining about having hit their limit.
What makes you so sure that genetics are positive and negative and not different?
What makes you so sure that we haven’t developed some kind of system to activate and deactivate some of our genes even if only narrowly or even modify them?
What makes you so sure that some people do not have genes that have them respond differently to training than others?
What makes you so sure that we haven’t hit the limit of genetic improvements for the brain?
How do you know?
As I do not agree
I wouldn’t be willing to bet my life on either outcome as far as Down Syndrome is concerned. Sure there are theoretical limits to what the human brain may be capable of performing at. There are going to be biological limits, computational limits, structural limitations, memory limitations, limitations which are not going to be so simple to have the tag genetics on them even within genetics.
Honestly, memory league makes even less sense, regardless of what human you take from this world if they don’t know about memory techniques in the entire 7b+ population, they are going to lose to the world champion. Even so giving one of them access to memory techniques is going to make a world of a difference. Do I think that the difference between one of them winning and the others not is genetics? No. There are far too many factors that are crucial.
To give a short example of how dubious this becomes in a long spiral
Assuming someone was somehow better able to remember content, the other person then decides to use a system that is converting more ‘digits’ , at a time. You would think that the person who is better able to remember would eventually win, but no, somehow the person converting more digits at a time has a larger capacity. The end result is then that the person less able to remember content is genetically more capable of having a larger stock of memories and thus can use a more effective system. It also means that the one learning much more slowly in the end has a higher limit. So… where exactly do you draw the line in this over simplified piece?
If I were to make a philosophical ring to it
You might as well be an evil scientist who takes some random stranger on the street and changes both your and their genetics. So much for the genetics that lead up to that.
Even going by genetics, there are going to be ways that are optimal for some that are not for others, when do you ever know that you are not just using the wrong way in a world where everyone tries to follow the same path?
Different is also not immediately better or worse.
I sincerely don’t know what you’re getting at. Are you claiming that a 90 year old person has the same performance potential as a 25 year old in memory league?
Pushing a ball off the table, then seeing it fall and saying everything in the entire universe falls is not true.
I’m saying you are essentially saying this kind of thing, because it seems obvious. It lacks too much detail and has too many other possibilities.
Not to forget to mention, ‘fall’ is not really defined well.
I’m 44 years old,and my memory is hundred times better now than it was in my 30!!!
Just out of curiosity, do you understand what the “price tag” is for NOT believing in freewill?
Because that’s probably the best way to look at it; what am I willing to “sacrifice/pay” for my belief system.
It is a cliche that still is excellent: practice gets you ever closer
The hidden parts of your brain will enjoy adding storage space
Side note, this was interesting: