Talk:Eidetic memory

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 February 2020 and 2 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NoemieB2000.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

"Akhter Ahsen" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Akhter Ahsen. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 25#Akhter Ahsen until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:16, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

How about revealing that εἶδος means "to see" and not just mentioning that it is a Greek word?

--Felix Tritschler (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Memory material in general

I reverted Jamesmcardle on this and this because they are different topics. This article is not about memory material in general. See WP:Synthesis. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding this? Do not WP:Edit war. What is not clear about our WP:Synthesis policy? The sources must be specifically about eidetic memory. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

This is not the Visual memory article. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Clearly there is a case for merging Visual Memory with Eidetic memory... The article does not make a distinction, with proper, reliable citations, between 'photographic memory' and 'eidetic memory'.Jamesmcardle^(talk) 07:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Frozen: You could start with a dictionary definition of 'eidetic' e.g. "relating to or denoting mental images having unusual vividness and detail, as if actually visible," which is precisely the subject of the research, and findings from that research, and method in the practice of art, I have introduced into the article. I don't see your point.Jamesmcardle^(talk) 07:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

I stand by what I stated above. You don't get my point because you, for whatever reason, don't understand our WP:Synthesis policy. And, no, there is not a good case for merging the Visual memory article (a broader topic) with the Eidetic memory article. And as for "the article does not make a distinction, with proper, reliable citations, between 'photographic memory' and 'eidetic memory'"? It does. It uses academic sources per WP:Scholarship. But it is also clear that eidetic memory and photographic memory are popularly used interchangeably. Where are the sources stating that visual memory and eidetic memory are popularly used interchangeably?

I await other opinions on this matter. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

No need to ping me to this page since I am obviously watching this article. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 07:56, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

With all due courtesy, as am I. Including this article in WP Skepticism indicates the bias not mentioned in https://www.britannica.com/science/eidetic-imagery (though I don't have full access), and with all due respects Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy quotes only old research. Having had my additions summarlly overruled, I'll step back politely and wait to see what others have to say. Jamesmcardle^(talk) 08:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Only old research? There is not a lot of research on this specific topic. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 08:08, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

That material does appear to be WP:Synthesis in this article, so it doesn't belong. I definitely don't see a case for merging with Visual memory. This is not the same thing. Crossroads ^-talk- 02:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Specifics Of Photographic Memory vs Popular Myth

Th78blue Hello. Replying to you in the article talk as opposed to individual page talk. Neither of your sources calls photographic memory "popular myth" and, indeed, the sources specify that forms of limited, event/visual-specific photographic memory exist. My edit reflects what is in the source material without discrediting the entire idea of some limited photographic memory. It also dispels the notion of "popular myth." Let me know if I am missing something by trying to clarify the sentence. Thanks.50.225.201.71 (talk) 07:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

I feel like the phrase "absolute recall of all events in a lifetime" overly narrows the scope of that definition and the previous text was better. There doesn't seem to be any compelling evidence that photographic memory lasting more than a few seconds or minutes exists -- let alone perfect recall of all events in one's entire life. Destynova (talk) 00:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

There is a viewpoint expressed in this article, and by Destynova who wrote above, that I find unreasonable. Ordinary language contains usages of the words "photographic" and "eidetic" to describe rare abilities of memory. Such abilities are very unusual, and statistically rare, and we obviously struggle to find meaningful words to describe them. The word "photographic" provides a useful metaphor, but I don't think ordinary usage of this phrase requires that metaphor to be literally true. Whatever problems might be presented by the term "photographic memory", it is not scientifically appropriate to assert the non-existence of persons with the abilities which evoke such descriptions. It is also not appropriate to apparently imply that all of the documentation concerning such people has been, in some way, specious. I hope this article is revised to acknowledge and validate the myriad of existing reports.

Wikipedia has a page titled "List of people claimed to possess an eidetic memory", and that article contains many references to credible documentation of extra-ordinary abilities. That list is capable of getting much longer. I just read a Wikipedia article about Isaac Asimov, who is not on the list, which described him as having an eidetic memory, so I considered adding him to that list. I don't have the documentation needed to add him.

I don't believe that historical documents should have to prove that those people's memories are completely perfect, for their entire lives, in order to demonstrate that some people have abilities of memory that are dramatically superior to the abilities of most people. I find it extremely odd for a Wikipedia article to claim that there is no compelling evidence for a phenomenon which is well documented as applicable to a great many people. The metaphorical use of a word like "photographic", is troublesome, but the word "eidetic" is a proper technical term. Janice Vian, Ph.D. (talk) 00:37, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

suggestions

I would like for there to be an option to narrate the article. 2600:1012:B12E:9902:482E:D29E:EB6E:8C61 (talk) 04:09, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2023 and 15 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zoejones107 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Zoejones107 (talk) 20:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Grammar and 'Flow'

Under the heading "Eidetic versus Photographic" the 1st sentence and its citation are the same as the 1st sentence in the intro above it. How about, "Although often used interchangeably, the two terms are, in fact, distinguishable from one another. While eidetic memory refers to..., photographic memory is..." L. Tringo Rudolph (talk) 16:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)