Seen Through One's Actions and Confirmation...

Basically we see others and ourselves through what we have done or what we are doing.
This means that our memories would work on the concept that we remember things based on their action.
Contrary to this would mean we would be remembering others based on things like still images.

Why don't we remember through still images?
Well, this is a two part thing...
Firstly, the still image would imply the action of what someone is doing, and it combines also with our memory of the subject of the image. This subject would, I feel, have to have some history, and would thus not have been there in that position for all it's existence...
Secondly, no real still image exists, as the supposed still image, is based on, a moving light particle, a grouping of points in time that make up the various parts of the image.

Furthermore, to test this, consider what do you use to remember something.
If it's a 'still image', then consider what you were doing to see it as 'still'. Consider, the way the mind handles to whole task of remembering that 'still image'. Consider, whether the stillness is just an illusion, an approximation, or simply a convenient method to allow confirmation.
One last thing, what did I mean by confirmation?
Well, I believe that memories are made by one sensation confirming another, such that you have seen the same thing twice. It can be relied upon, that, it was remembered as the same thing. Okay, so how did our memory start then, and how did it grow?
Well, for a start no two things are exactly the same, just similar enough to be remembered in the same light.
Then, memory would have started, firstly, when we would have first sensed something, which may have happened in the womb, where a mother can help, probably not consciously, confirm the beginnings of our sensation, by the release of neurotransmitters into the unborn child (through the umbilical cord). The growth of memory would have occurred many times during pregnancy, and relied on the effect of different sensations being like enough to others in different ways.
How did the first memory get born?
Tricky question!
One possibility is, that, it could have come from without the body... Perhaps through the soul or spiritual connections...
Another possibility is that part of consciousness is born from the non-genetic influence of the Universe. What I mean here is, that, a particle knows how to be a particle, and as knowledge is based on memory, a particle knows to remember to be a particle.
How is that possible?
The particle would have to have some sensory influence(s)...
Perhaps, a God, or souls being around at the time, would be examples of sensory influence (without the particle actually having had a soul of it's own)...
Alright, one last question I will try and answer...
How does a God or soul know to remember?
The first event in the Universe would be the beginning of memory, and we've already said that memory relies on movement. So that first movement needs to happen before memory, but is fully sensed, by it being remembered...
The soul or God would know to remember, simply, from it being their divine purpose, like something coming naturally to someone.
So this first movement caused the beginning memory, and that first memory was made to be memory through one other event.
It would be my belief, that, that event involved there being more than one thing sensing, perhaps either more than one God or soul, or at least one God and one soul.
Through their somewhat conscious connection, the different points of view would allow there to be a common memory, through the two (or more) sensations.

Sorry for going on so long, but would appreciate you input here...