What fixes the referents of episodic memories? While developed theories are lacking, it is generally assumed that the causal production of a memory, via memory traces, determines its referent. Recently, it has been pointed out that the “promiscuity” of memory traces poses a problem for this approach. Proposed solutions focus on finding some nonpromiscuous causal link. In this paper, I refine the problem posed by promiscuous memory traces and show that these solutions fail. By developing the question of mnemonic episodic reference within the framework of informational signs, I argue that no pure “producer-side” theory of reference will work. The only solution, I argue, is to abandon pure producer-side theories for theories which appeal to consumer-side factors, i.e., factors concerning how referring signs are used. Once it is admitted that mnemonic episodic reference depends on consumer-side factors, the natural question is whether producer-side factors (i.e., causal production) play any role at all in mnemonic episodic reference. I conclude by outlining two possible pure consumer-side theories for mnemonic episodic reference, one based on the work of Imogen Dickie and one based on the work of Ruth Millikan. Both theories explain how the referents of episodic memories are fixed without any appeal to a causal link, and, hence, are compatible with “post-causal” theories of memory, like simulationism.

是什么固定了情景记忆的指涉对象？虽然缺乏成熟的理论，但人们普遍认为，记忆的因果产生通过记忆痕迹决定了其所指对象。最近，有人指出，内存痕迹的“混杂性”给这种方法带来了问题。提出的解决方案侧重于寻找一些非混杂的因果关系。在本文中，我细化了混杂的内存痕迹带来的问题，并表明这些解决方案失败了。通过在信息符号的框架内提出助记情景指称的问题，我认为纯粹的“生产者方”指称理论是行不通的。我认为，唯一的解决办法是放弃纯粹的生产者方理论，转而采用吸引消费者方因素的理论，即有关如何使用指示符号的因素。一旦承认助记情节参照取决于消费者方面的因素，自然的问题是生产者方面的因素（即因果生产）是否在助记情节参照中发挥任何作用。最后，我概述了两种可能的纯消费者方理论，用于记忆片段参考，一种基于伊莫金·迪基的工作，另一种基于露丝·密立根的工作。这两种理论都解释了情景记忆的所指对象是如何固定的，而不需要任何因果联系，因此，与“后因果”记忆理论（如模拟主义）兼容。