It is a matter of opinion, but I feel that emotional strain is about as good a
notion of similar attack on the brain as you can get. I can think of no mental
activity where someone is forced to maintain highest level of mental power
without any let-up (as people believed about blindfold chess) for hours, so there
is no previous data to go on. In such cases, one must judge whether something is
dangerous or not based on what you feel is reasonable, and I can see either view
(that this is or is not dangerous) as reasonable.

Then of major players known at the time, 2 of 4 suffer some form of brain
disease, a fairly uncommon though not truly rare malady. In my opinion, this
would move people towards the direction of being more fearful, and rationally so,
while hardly constituting a proof of the hypothesis.

Louis and I seem to disagree on this; other opinions, perhaps?

Jerry Spinrad

In article t.com, Louis Blair writes:
| Jeremy Spinrad wrote:
|
| Is it irrational to believe that a traumatic childhood
| incident can cause severe mental problems which build
| up and manifest themselves fully much later?
|
| Is it rational to believe that stress from combat can
| cause psychological damage which is covered up at first
| but causes problems much later? Many veterans believe
| it is.
|
| Does the fact that some veterans fought in very
| dangerous situations with no apparent ill effects
| mean that others did not suffer shell shock from
| less serious exposure?
|
| The notion that extreme stress can cause insanity,
| which may appear much later, is still believed
| (look at accounts of holocaust survivors who
| committed suicide years later).
|
| _
| A problem with all of these examples is that there
| is typically some degree of upset at the time that
| the event occurs. No upset was reported at or anywhere
| near the time of Morphy's blindfold demonstrations.
| It does not seem "very rational" to me to choose to
| believe in an invisible upset in a situation where
| there is a total absence of evidence for it.
|
| Also, the examples above are examples of emotional
| upset, not strain due to some sort of excessive
| exertion.
|
|
| Jeremy Spinrad wrote:
|
| However, we no longer believe playing 8 games
| blindfold causes severe stress. Many people did,
| and using Paulsen as a counterexample does not
| make their belief illogical. The accurate
| statement of the belief is that playing blindfold
| chess greatly increases your chance of having
| some form of brain damage, not that it must
| always cause it.
|
| _
| My idea of "very rational" is that one does not
| choose to believe something unless there is
| evidence for it. Labourdonnais may have had
| trouble shortly after one of his blindfold
| exhibitions, but Philidor didn't and Paulsen
| didn't and the pattern for Morphy was nothing
| like what happened to Labourdonnais. I see
| no "very rational" justification for this
| notion of greatly increased chances of
| SOME FORM of brain damage. Looks like
| fudging the data to me.