Clarifies a conflict between imagination's epistemology and accuracy conditions of remembering, suggesting a rejection of alethism.
This paper clarifies and then indicates a conflict between, on the one hand, influential and longstanding ideas in the epistemology of imagination and, on the other, an emerging view of the accuracy conditions of remembering and the content of episodic memory—namely, alethism . Although we explore several ways to resolve the conflict, we take the most plausible to be to reject alethism. Drawing on assumptions made on both sides of debates about the epistemic limits of imagination, the paper constitutes an extended argument in favour of (‘strong’) authenticism about the accuracy conditions of remembering. Authenticists can maintain that experience is necessary for certain forms of imagining and also that episodic memory is what supports and explains this fact by virtue of providing a privileged store of experiential knowledge.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McCarroll et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: