Learning and memory rely on each other so greatly that it is very difficult to imagine memories forming without the process of learning. Although there are many possibilities concerning altering memories via scientific induction, what do you induce in an organism? For example, what is the nature of the memory? If you are to invoke a memory of riding a bike, what do you use to signal the motor reflexes to go through the motions of riding a bike. I suppose that one could remember riding a bike (i.e., see or picture the motions) but be unable to physically perform them because of lack of learning.
I remind myself that learning fuels the chemicals to ignite the memory process. Biologically, one must learn to create a memory. How can an artificial memory be instilled without the chemical engineering of memory? To produce a memory, we must have an experience and a behavior. If we chemically induce a virtual experience, how do we produce a memory without the organism’s behavior? Furthermore, if it were possible for artificial memories to be induced in an organism, I would guess that it could only be done with explicit memories where our conscious observes or meets people, places and things. Implicit memories may be harder to alter or re-create because of the unconscious motor behavior necessary to form that particular memory.
Another thing to take into consideration is the fact that a scientifically altered memory may not be able to convert to a long-term memory because of the brain plausibility filtration process. Suppose the short-term memory has no physical or behavioral effect (which can seem near to, if not entirely impossible). In that case, the pre-frontal cortex may very well be able to tell whether or not the memory is credible enough to convert to long-term.
In a sense, memories can already be altered and placed inconspicuously. This memory, whether accurate or false, can be added to knowledge already gained and knowledge yet to be gained to create an accurate memory in the sense that they believe it to be true. The memory is an actual memory of what they were led to believe.
The implications of this memory alteration theory, aside from the ethical implications, would include the side effect of severe confusion; confusion to the point of the organism failing to function normally. If a memory is implanted or chemically altered, it will affect the organism’s previous memories. If these memories (both real and false) would happen to be on the ‘opposite ends’ of the organism’s life, the organism might not know how to function. However, it can also have the completely opposite effect. For example, if a person has truly learned to ride a bike but has later been ‘installed’ the memory of not knowing how to ride a bike, the person may pick it up on his own because his brain is already aware of how to go through the motions. This just leaves the person to question the authenticity of his own memory.
If an organism has learned to survive, instilling an unlearned memory could corrupt the organism’s ability to survive. Memories are a record of what we have learned. So, would we be learning via chemicals, electrics, etc.? Not only does memory depend on learning, but learning depends on memory. If our memory is being altered, how does that affect our learning? Knowledge would have an entirely different meaning.