If we do not posit a faculty of memory as storage for memories, maybe we will know better that the facts represented by memories can move free together with the present facts.
The analysis of the role of memory in knowledge and in the use of language should be replaced by a comparison between actual things or words and their pale correspondents from one particular memory or another.
The tedious work to be done in each case seems to not be an efficient means of progressing in knowledge, although our thoughts about things and words usually raise from grasping such faded past images of them. The proposition ‘This apple is a fruit’ is not caused by ‘this apple’ and by the category of ‘fruits’, but primarily by the belief in the existence of a past apple, conceived as shadowy as it is required for discussing and thinking about it. Because no thing allows to be thought of or spoken about in plain light, but only to be perceived.
So, thought is not an illuminating process in the beginning, but the use of the capacity of dealing with shadows.