Abstract

According to a standard view in psychology and neuroscience, there are multiple memory systems in the brain. Philosophers and scientists of memory rely on the idea that there are multiple memory systems in the brain to infer that procedural memory is not a cognitive form of memory. As a result, memory is considered to be a disunified capacity. In this article, I evaluate two criteria used by Michaelian to demarcate between cognitive and non-cognitive memory systems: appeal to stored content and retrieval flexibility. By considering several empirical cases I argue that the criteria offered ultimately fail to distinguish between memory systems. The procedural memory system is neither contentless nor inflexible.