Arrrrrrrrrgh. Little Johnny can't help himself--he must respond. I agree with your every word, MLE. I just want folks to realize that "brain burn-in"
is as much a theory as "driver burn-in." And though you have the winds of some sound ideas behind your sails, what sticks in my craw is the way many anti-burn-in folks so brutally assert their own counter-theories as fact. It's no good to pound a true believer's skull into the pavement, over and over again, while asserting your own admittedly more logical position, which, despite its logic, has
no scientific backing, at the moment at least.
Your a skeptic, right? So am I. I'm with you all the way, buddy, but I'm not a skeptic for the sake of skepticism (I'm sure you're not either). And let's face it: it's so easy to be skeptical of other peoples ideas (they are so clearly wrong after all), but it's so hard--hard as nails, I say--to turn that skepticism inward, toward your own ideas and beliefs. This is something I try to do: call it a philosophy. I scorch my own ideas regularly. I demand proof,
especially of myself, and then after some serious introspection, and only then, will I go after other folks and their hair-brained beliefs. It's just the way I am, I suppose.
Again, though I agree with your every word, I have learned to look for evidence to buffer my counter-claims. But the evidence concerning this issue isn't out there at the moment (not that I've seen at least), which means we have no way to genuinely refute or falsify the burn-in claim. All this considered: Is it wrong of me to now ask, "Let's wait for the evidence before committing ourselves to a final verdict?" Apologies for dragging this out further. And nothing I've said here is said out of anger or hostility, but tone is sooo tricky in writing.
Oh, here's one more crazy claim: The devil made me write this.
