>>12833594Find me an academic source claiming the existence of perfect memory recall. Some people have really good memory, but nobody has perfect memory, in the pop-culture sense of photographic memory. It's not exactly a major topic in psychology or cognitive science, but amongst the people who do research on memory, it's pretty much taken for grant that humans don't possess perfect recall. I'm not even sure the brain has enough storage capacity to store all of ones experiences. Iirc your CNS processes several terrabytes of information every second.
When psychologists use the term 'eidetic' is actual scholarly contexts, all it means is the ability to recall prior visual experiences in high detail, even in the absence of perceptual cues or reminders. It's associated primarily with children, it's considered extremely common, it only cover visual memory, and it doesn't persist over the long term. I haven't seen anything that even considers the possibility of perfect, long-term memory in general (i.e. Non-visual) contexts. In the psychological literature, 'eidetic memory' just pertains to highly accurate visual recall when no relevant stimuli is immediately present.
E.g. This seems to be one of the big papers on the subject
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pms.1964.19.1.131as you can see in the abstract, eidetic memory is not permanent, it is only visual, and it's not define as perfect recall. Memory is a spectrum, and 'eidetic memory' is not a valid phenotypic category, it's just shorthand for saying that someone has really good visual recall. Perfect, permanent, long-term memory doesn't exist, and I'm not even sure it's physically possible given the architecture and information constraints of the human nervous system, and the sheer volume of perceptual information available over the course of a human lifespan, although that's just speculation, on my part.
