Photographic memory from NLP???

[D.O.nysus]

I was wondering if anyone has taken a Photoreading and/or NLP course. I have heard unbelieveable success stories but none have been reported by med. students. I think the legitimate classes cost around $2000-$4000 but if the improvement in memory is as significant as they say (near photographic)I think the benefits outweigh the cost. Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Dr. Pedo]

Having majored in bio and psy, I have dealt with this topic (study aids) often. First off, be careful of training programs that advertise photographic "like" abilities, reading 1000 words a min, compartmentalizing advancements, etc... Bottom-line there is no such thing as photographic memory (several wanna-be reseach but none are reproducible) or speed reading (contrary to popular and uneducated belief, the saccadic movement of the eyes only allow for ~4-7 spaces, not words, to be seen at a time.) Therefore, no matter how fast you try to read you are limited by the ability of the eye. Speed reading is an interesting marketing ploy. Sure you can be taught to scan material and look for key words in a sentence, however retention and overall detailed knowledge is sacrificed. If you want to be a better/faster reader and remember more, EXPAND your vocabulary and knowledge. I know you just said, no @#%^, but it is true. Take a Ph.D in economics and have them read a 100 page book on economics. Then test them on its content. How fast do you think they'll be able to read it? How much do you think they'll retain and recall? Can they speed-read and show incredible recall---definitely, but it is because the material is familiar and what they miss by scanning is made-up by their vast knowlege on the subject not because of a secret technique. Want to test this concept, hand them a 100 page book on quantum mechanics. Will they be as efficient?

My cog. psychology prof said it best when she said if you want to remember better, read faster, or find a short-cut in learning you'll soon find that repetition is the ONLY mother of learning. If you want to be able to speed-read----become an expert on the information/concept and than any book on the topic will be read with great ease and retention. There is no doubt that learing how to organize/take better notes and compartmentalizing items for better retention and recall will make you more efficient----I just don't think you need to pay someone $3000 to tell you what you can find in the public library for free.

If you want some insight on my scant picture of this issue, see if you can meet with someone in your cog. psy. department at your university. Especially b4 you spend big $$$'s. And if you are dead set on NLP---- as a research project our class tested "Success Mastery with NLP" by Charles Faulkner and Robert McDonald. I bought it for $16, however I'd be willing to part with it for the going rate of $1000! :wink:

regards, R.R.B

 

[MacGyver]

Not that this is really relevant to the topic, but several of you have mentioned photographic memory.

My understanding of "photographic memory" (i.e. true eidetic memory) is probably a lot different than the term you are using.

While there are many people with "good" memories, a true eidetic is so rare that some scientists would argue that it doesnt really exist.

The reason its called photographic is because it implies exact reproduction of the target material.

Its kinda like the following hypothetical:

Suppose you are given an aerial picture of a forest (perhaps 50 feet above the treeline) containing maybe 100 trees.

Now, suppose you are given around 2-5 minutes to look at the photograph with no materials available for copying or even writing down anything. After that time period, the photograph is taken away from you.

Now get this: a true eidetic (photographic) memory would be able to reproduce an exact duplicate of the picture, INCLUDING EVERY SINGLE LEAF ON EVERY TREE VISIBLE IN THE PICTURE.

I think that gives you a good idea of just how good a photographic memory really is and also makes clear that it is probably next to impossible that any of us has come into contact with such a person.

 

[D.O.nysus]

Thank you guys for your thoughtful and comprehensive responses. Needlesstosay, my skepticism was well founded. I will investigate your more economical suggestions. Any other insight is still welcomed...thanks again.