supposedly Eidetic memory is somewhat common in childhood
"Eidetic memory is typically found only in young children, as it is virtually nonexistent in adults.[5][6] Hudmon stated, "Children possess far more capacity for eidetic imagery than adults, suggesting that a developmental change (such as acquiring language skills) may disrupt the potential for eidetic imagery."[6] Eidetic memory has been found in 2 to 10 percent of children aged 6 to 12. It has been hypothesized that language acquisition and verbal skills allow older children to think more abstractly and thus rely less on visual memory systems."
one way to think about what education is, is that its a process for taking your perceptual inputs, and putting them on an abstract lattices
this is an obviously useful process in all sorts of ways
but it probably does change the way you both notice things, and remember things
-------
(there a sort of similar thing going on when you're looking at something to draw it, you have to sort of un-abstract it, instead of putting the lightwaves hitting your eye onto the lattice 'apple', you have to get it back to lightwaves in certain pattern)
> one way to think about what education is, is process for taking your perceptual inputs, and putting them on an abstract lattice
this is an obviously useful process in all sorts of ways
but it probably does change the way you both notice things, and remember things
The problem with this is you're inducing a hypothesis via intuition and analogy. I don't see any reason to think education has the deleterious effect you're proposing. I guess it could, but I don't think there's any compelling evidence for it. It doesn't strike me as the simplest explanation.
From my perspective, I don't think there is any inverse correlation between memory capability and educational achievement. I could just as reasonably say eidetic memory decreases as language skills develop because we no longer have as much need for episodic recollection versus semantic recollection.
But neither of these proposals is grounded in anything empirical, it's intuitive speculation based on limited anecdata. The simpler explanation, by Occam's Razor, is that educational achievement trains memory faculties.
I'm confused by "you're inducing a hypothesis via intuition and analogy"
how else do you create a hypothesis?
You're correct that I haven't done a peer reviewed study on the question.
(fwiw, I suspect we're talking around each other, I'm not sure I disagree that educational achievement trains memory that fits on an abstract lattice, what I question, is memory that doesn't fit on a lattice, either way, yes, its all mere speculation on my part, imo that's the sort of thing internet message boards are good for)
"Eidetic memory is typically found only in young children, as it is virtually nonexistent in adults.[5][6] Hudmon stated, "Children possess far more capacity for eidetic imagery than adults, suggesting that a developmental change (such as acquiring language skills) may disrupt the potential for eidetic imagery."[6] Eidetic memory has been found in 2 to 10 percent of children aged 6 to 12. It has been hypothesized that language acquisition and verbal skills allow older children to think more abstractly and thus rely less on visual memory systems."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidetic_memory
one way to think about what education is, is that its a process for taking your perceptual inputs, and putting them on an abstract lattices
this is an obviously useful process in all sorts of ways
but it probably does change the way you both notice things, and remember things
-------
(there a sort of similar thing going on when you're looking at something to draw it, you have to sort of un-abstract it, instead of putting the lightwaves hitting your eye onto the lattice 'apple', you have to get it back to lightwaves in certain pattern)