You say “apple” to me and I’m #1, glossy skin, insides, all that

And how in the hell does one navigate life, or enjoy a book, if they’re not a #1?! Reading a book is like watching a movie. I subconsciously assign actor’s faces to characters and watch as the book rolls on.

Yet #5’s are not handicapped in the slightest. They’re so “normal” that mankind is just now figuring out we’re far apart on this thing. Fucking weird.

EDIT: Showed this to my wife and she was somewhat mystified as to what I was asking. Pretty sure she’s a 5. I get frustrated as hell when I ask her to describe a thing and she’s clueless. “Did the radiator hose pop off, or is it torn and cracked?” “I don’t know!”

EDIT2: The first Star Wars book after the movie came out was Splinter in the Mind’s Eye. I feel like I got that title. What’s it mean to you?

  • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    The current prevailing theory is that we (4 here) actually do create the images much the same as you 1s, we’re just not consciously aware of it. Our brains are doing the same thing behind the scenes, and they just translate it differently. Some personal “evidence” of this that I have are that when I’m high, I have an easier time visualizing, and that I dream VERY vividly.

    • SolarBoy@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I have a feeling that this is also influenced by people that experienced (emotional) trauma. Some people dissociate from their feelings as a result of things that happened in the past, and this can also impact their ability to visualise things. (Because their brain is protecting them from re-experiencing their trauma)

  • GCanuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    No snark, but how do you test this?

    Like I can picture an apple, but it’s not real, so how do I know if I’m a 1 or a 4?

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      If you think of how an apple looks and you get a visual representation, depending on how detailed it is. If not, you’re a 5.

    • Bgugi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I think the “test” is to describe a scene, then ask details that weren’t explicitly described, but would be necessary to fill in the gaps. It requires honesty (nothing to prevent 5s from making up answers post-hoc or 1s just feigning ignorance.)

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Describe the apple you see in your imagination. Color? Texture? Shadows? Environment? Can you draw your image?

      There is some flexibility here; I tend to have different levels (1-4) based with numbers scaling to how awake I am. (More awake = less detail)

    • Killer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think it’s the amount of detail when you picture it. Can you rotate it, cut it, maybe take bite out of it?

    • Nalivai@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Did you try to think of a real apple but got a not real picture of it? Can you change it into some different thing? Can you change it to a realistic picture if you want?

  • the_q@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    144
    ·
    4 days ago

    You guys are gonna lose your shit when you find out some people don’t have an inner monologue.

    • Glide@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      What the fuck do you mean some people don’t have an inner monologue. How do they… Think thoughts? I literally cannot comprehend how they work through thoughts.

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          The proper way humans are supposed to think is with Critical Thinking Skills. It used to be taught in schools, often in English classes. Remember being taught how to write an essay from the General concept to down to the specific point? That was teaching Critical Thinking Skills, learning how to craft a coherent argument.

          Today, many states actively discourage the teaching of Critical Thinking Skills. Republicans in particular hate it. About a decade ago, the Texas Republican Party even included opposition to Critical Thinking Skills in their state platform, claiming that it taught children to defy authority figures. No it doesn’t, it just teaches them when those authority figures are trying to exploit them. They actually tried to position Critical Thinking Skills as detrimental to childhood education.

          If you don’t develop Critical Thinking Skills, you will substitute orderly thinking with a sort of ad hoc, improvisatory, chaotic thinking, which is easy for someone with a nefarious agenda to tap into and manipulate. Those with good Critical Thinking Skills learn to recognize and resist things like propaganda.

        • turdcollector69@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          Literally everyone does this tho. It only feels like everyone else because you can’t be aware of when you’re not thinking.

          • saimen@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            4 days ago

            No, having kids now I am sometimes super tired only being able to function for the daily activities without much planning and thinking about others. This made me realize this state (or even worse) is probably normal for a lot of people.

      • Bgugi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m a word-er, but I think hank green explained it pretty well in a video. Language is just an I/O bus, thoughts occur as a set of abstractions with associations.

      • Noved@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah I’m calling bullshit on this one haha, op is implying some people cannot process word if not spoken or written. That would be so unbelievably disabling you probably couldn’t function in society.

        • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          It’s not that they don’t process words, it’s that those without internal monologues may think in concepts, images, or visualized actions rather than using the words those concepts are attached to. As an example, some deaf people if they have an internalized monologue have reported their monologue being visualized sign language, instead of audible speech spoken in their head. There’s quite a lot of variability in how someone processes their internal thoughts.

          Some without internal monologues have mentioned that they can vocalize text in their head, but only if done consciously, and they usually find that it would make reading agonizingly slow to do so for them.

          Simon Roper does a couple really excellent videos on this subject, if you’d like to hear a very eloquent first hand experience of someone else’s non-monologue internal thoughts.

          Also @absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz

      • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Easily we just do. It’s like breathing. We just do it.

        Can you explain how you breath? Or beat your heart? Or create blood?

        That’s how we do.

      • rhombus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        Probably different for everyone, but I have neither and sometimes feel almost compelled to speak my thoughts out loud. If I don’t speak them they’re just kind of abstract feelings or impressions.

        • NewSocialWhoDis@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          My mom had a stroke that was caught early, and she was this way in the first couple years afterwards. I had to ask her to stop talking to me so I could read a menu, and she was self-aware about it. She was like “I’m sorry. Just tell me. I just have to speak my thoughts into existence these days.”

          • rhombus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            It’s interesting to hear about someone having a similar experience due to a brain injury. I have always wondered if my inability to internalize thoughts was some kind of developmental thing; if I don’t speak them or write them down then they’re really scattered and sorta incoherent.

      • MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        My best guess: sometimes, one idea flows to the next in my head without the words. Usually I “feel” sentences falling into place at least a few words ahead of what I’m saying, at least kind of. But sometimes I just sort of talk, without the inner mo ologue, and it’s mildly confusing. Like, who the hell is building the sentences if it’s not me? And why does what’s coming out of my mouth totally agree with what I would be saying if I could build the words right now?

        Basically, sometimes the place that ACTUALLY assembles the words bypasses the self-awareness layer, and the words just come out.

        I imagine this is somewhat analogous to the people with no inner monologue; there are still thoughts, they just don’t take the form of words. Pictures, concepts, or even other things that make less intuitive sense to those of us with inner monologues.

    • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      This one I find difficult to comprehend.

      My inner monologue is petty much my entire thought process. How does one think and rationalise without one?

      • alternategait@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I’m a 5 on this scale (maybe a 4 1 on this scale (maybe a 2 if I’m distracted, processing other stuff) and I have a big component of kinesthetic sense and some emotional tone comes into play. It actually often takes work for me to turn ideas into words. This gets harder if I’m tired or sick or something.

        Edits: I forgot the actual anchors.

        • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          I am a 5 on this scale, and for all other senses. No smell, sound, touch or taste either.

          So yea; it when I say my inner monologue is pretty much my whole thought process.

          It totally blew my mind; when I realized others could see actual images in their heads.

          The no inner monologue thing still boggles me. Considering my point of view; where it is all of my inner self.

          • MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            “Picture in your mind”…

            Me, a 5 on the scale, young: Weird turn of phrase, but okay. I have the… idea of an apple.

            Me, still a 5 on the scale but now an adult, in about 2023, learning about aphantasia and that other people were being literal about mind’s eye: WHAT.

            • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              Yep…me for 40 years; that is just a metaphor to help think about things. Then one day reading about aphantasia…WTF!!!people can actually see, it’s not just a metaphor.

              But then I had a conversation with my partner; she can combine flavors in her mind and know, pretty accurately, what stuff will taste like; it is one reason she loves cooking.

              People can actually get a song stuck in their heads…again, not a metaphor.

              Mind blown!!!

              My 7yo can project images from his mind into the world; what the hell. He can “watch” movie when looking at the wall when he is in bed going to sleep; with the sounds and everything.

              • MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 days ago

                I have some level of auditory imagination; I can play back something I’ve heard a few times, but it’s more like a ghost of the thing than feeling like it’s hitting my ears somehow.

                The main non-verbal sense I use in my head is spatial. There is a 3d space that I can imagine objects within, rotate around, kind of analyze things about it. There is no visual component to this, yet it feels like it shares the space that the mind’s eye could see into.

                I’ve described the closest thing I have to visual imagination as like many of the things that happen in the brain’s processing of images after the eyes: resolving patterns of light into shapes and lines, processing shapes into the sense of a particular recognized object. If I think about a tree, I definitely don’t see a tree in any sense. But I do sort of feel like I did just see a tree, just… without any sense of light or feeling like I actually did any seeing, metaphorical or otherwise. All the analysis, none of the pixels.

                • planish@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  I have a little more of the seeing, but I also want to reach for your ghost metaphor. Imagining a tree for me is a little like seeing a tree, but quite a bit more like having just seen a tree.

                • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  I call this the curtain; when I imagine something, like a tree, I can’t see the tree. But it is still there; just like it is behind a black curtain, no images from the tree can be seen.

    • shalafi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      That should be my next post! 😂 My inner monologue is like words on a page. And again, I can’t see how one could enjoy a novel with the monologue and mind’s eye.

  • vapeloki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Solid 5 here. And I love to read. I love the smell of books, I love the feeling in my hands and I love the stories of course. I don’t have an image of an character in my head, I don’t have an image if the landscape, but I still enjoy it.

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I am good at design, can visualize how something will look when it’s done but no don’t SEE in my mind like that when I imagine how things look. It’s a different sort of knowing. Cannot hold an image and rotate it in my mind and absolutely can’t read a map that isn’t facing the right way, there is a blindness.

    Surely not antphasic because I do see in dreams, same as through eyes. And I do KNOW how things look when they aren’t in front of me, and can know what imaginary things might look like too, but it doesn’t at all feel like seeing it with my eyes.

    Love reading. Love love love it, learned when I was very young, same age I was learning to talk, actually, like a language not a skill. And I do have an internal ear, when I remember music I hear it in my mind and it is so much like hearing it in my ears. Imagining how something looks does not feel the same as seeing it.

  • realitista@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 days ago

    I can see things in my head, rotate them, look from different angles, try out different colors for a room, etc. But it’s not really the same as seeing visually. It’s just kind of imagining what it would look like. It’s hard to explain. It’s as if you were dreaming it while you are still awake. But also less vivid than a dream.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Same here, I can rotate things in my head and change their color, but it’s not quite HD. It’s like an abstract image of what it should look like. It’s also quite fleeting since I get easily distracted. But when I’m half-asleep or waking up on a lazy Sunday, holy shit, I can visualize so many things in bright colors and can see them clearly. I wish I could do that all the time.

    • shalafi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      My architect buddy wanted to hire me to handle IT, do drafting in my down time. He met me managing a reprographics shop, blueprint place. “I can’t look at a blueprint and visualize what it’s going to look like.”

      LOL, he looked like I slapped him! Totally alien thought to that man.

    • shalafi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yep! Craziest thing is that we just started looking into this thing in the past 10-20 years. Proof to me that it’s no handicap, but if you took my mind’s eye away I’d feel crippled.

      • Goodeye8@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        It has its benefits. You can talk absolute depravity, like Trump farting so much shit into Ivankas mouth that liquid diarrhea is overflowing from the side of her mouth with chunks of yesterday’s pasta bolognese dangling off her chin, and get no mental image of that filth. But you can enjoy that imagery.

        • turdcollector69@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’m probably 1 but I can tune stuff out.

          Stuff like “you are now manually breathing” doesn’t really bother me.

          I’ve also got a lot of intrusive thoughts so maybe I’m just practiced at shutting it down.

    • Mondoshawan@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      It’s more of a spectrum with hyper- and a- phantasia being the extremes on each end

      (Prophantasia is considered the ability to project imagined images into your physical field of view)

      If you really want to blow your mind (heh), you should check out SDAM (Severely Deficient Autobiographical Memory), which is thought to be linked to aphantasia

      • Potential Piñata@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Wow. I didn’t know about the term “prophantasia” until now. Probably because I think that visualizing things in our 3d world is a normally developed imagination power of the people who don’t have Aphantasia.

        Prophantasia seems like biologically evolved Augmented Reality. Where instead of wearing a piece of AR glass, We’re naturally born with this trait.

        I can pull out my palm in front of me and visualize a small cat jumping around. Not for too long because I cannot imagine the random movement a cat does. But, as a still object, visualizing an apple is easy.

        I am more curious to wonder if someone can manually develop Spatial Intelligence without being born with it priorly.

        • planish@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Wait you can not only in some sense see a-cat-on-your-hand when imagining that, but also see an imaginary cat on the hand you are actually seeing???

          Do you then not see the stuff behind the cat while you are imaging the cat to be in the way???

          • Potential Piñata@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Imagining a cat on my hand is just for adding easiness.

            I can imagine a cat anywhere. Right now, a tall water bottle is on a table in front of me. I can imagine a cat one the table, walking towards the bottle and ultimately jumps on it. I can also imagine the bottle to shake or fall down as an impact.

            Imagining a still object, for example an apple is more easy. I can imagine the apple has a non scientifical gravity trait and it keeps bouncing on every flat surfaces around the room.

            I’ve been considering this as normal imagination power for the people who don’t have Aphantasia. Probably because I can imagine like this with ease.

            Seeing past the thing that I imagine is kinda a cognitive blindspot. Because, I don’t try to look past what I imagine. A cat or an apple.

            Only when I get aware of the fact if I really do look past or not, the confusion arises. But it is much difficult for me to imagine a transparent object. Like an apple made of glass.

  • greedytacothief@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 days ago

    Some people also don’t have an internal monologue. I’m probably a 3 or 4, it takes significant effort to see something in my head. But my thoughts a words and they definitely have a voice.

    I assume there is a scale for how well we can imagine every sense.

  • Lightsong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I can’t imagine not doing #1, the only way I’ll do other numbers is if you’re asking me to imagine a hand drawn apple, colored or not, etc.

  • Aeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 days ago

    I don’t know how to explain it but mine is in constant flux.

    I’ll bounce between full on 3d animated cutscenes to like “Old ass TRON style wireframes of the object”

  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    4 days ago

    I’m a #5 on that scale.

    And how in the hell does one navigate life, or enjoy a book, if they’re not a #1?! Reading a book is like watching a movie. I subconsciously assign actor’s faces to characters and watch as the book rolls on.

    I won’t say I’m not jealous of people who’re #1s. However, to directly answer your question, it’s not like our heads are empty. You think apple and (apparently) ‘see’ an apple. I think apple and it’s like thinking of how you’d describe an apple. It’s red, it’s round. It has a stem. It’s juicy. It tastes good… but I can’t see it. Or anything else. They’re just thoughts.

    I have a very difficult time with facial recognition, presumably as a result of this. If I’m watching a movie where there’s a lot of characters that are shown but not named, I have a difficult time following that. I need to be able to assign names to them to keep them straight in my head, and often-times if a character isn’t named but they’re important, I’ll assign them a name myself just to have something to track them with. I can recognize people I interact with a lot obviously but if you asked me to describe what someone looks like who I’m not currently interacting with, that’s very difficult for me to do, beyond very surface-level stuff, like their gender or their build. If I had to describe someone for a police sketch, I’d be useless at that. Remembering facial features is like remembering a list of words; I can’t just call up an image of them to describe… if I haven’t already committed that description to memory, I can’t describe the person.

    It’s funny, honestly, because I never realized this wasn’t how everyone is until I saw the image you linked some years back. I actually called up my mother immediately after and asked her what she could see. The conversation went something like:

    “When you think of an apple, can you see the apple?”

    “Yes…”

    “Yeah, but like… you can actually see it, though?”

    “…yes…?”

    “Yeah but I mean like… you can see it, as if you’re looking at it?”

    “…yes, what is this about?”

    • TastehWaffleZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I had that exact same conversation with my mom but it went like this:

      “Ok mom, picture a cow in your head”

      “Oookayyy”

      “Now you can see a cow right?”

      “What do you mean”

      “Like… You can see a picture of the cow, right?”

      “Nooo”

      My dad chimes in “yes, obviously”

      “…crap. Mom, I have some news for you”

      Both of us grew up thinking we had no imagination or were dumb. I remember being incredibly frustrated when a teacher taught us the concept of the Memory Palace where you picture things in rooms of a house. Like if you had to remember five playing cards you’d picture a room with 7 red clowns, with hearts on their cheeks. Then in the next room you’d picture a king, holding up a spade, etc. That just made it harder for me to remember and the teacher kept telling me I wasn’t listening or trying.

      I feel that explanation about being useless to a sketch artist on a spiritual level, that blew my mind as a kid. To this day I can’t really describe what my parents or wife looks like, I can just list characteristics. I feel my brain trying to visualize but then it comes up empty

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 days ago

        I used to want very much to be an artist, or at least, be able to draw capably, but it’s always seemed impossible. I can think of what I want to draw in a macro sense - like, if I was thinking of that famous Norman Rockwell painting with the boy with the bindle sitting at the diner next to the police officer, I can certainly imagine the scene. Just thinking of that painting from memory, the officer is looking down at the boy who’s looking up at the officer, there’s a man behind the counter in a white outfit looking at both of them with an amused expression, there’s some pastries or donuts or something on the counter…

        But to draw something, it feels like you’ve got to be able to imagine the micro details, and without references to look at, I just can’t do that. The same is true if I was going to try to describe the minutia in the painting - what color is the officer’s hair? Are any of the characters wearing glasses? What do the wrinkles in their clothes look like? What kind of shoes are they wearing?

        I even have a difficult time commissioning artwork as a result of this, because it’s difficult to describe what I want without having something visual to reference.

        • [object Object]@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’ve seen a recommendation for the books ‘Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain’ by Betty Edwards and ‘The Creative License: Giving Yourself Permission to Be The Artist You Truly Are’ by Danny Gregory. The commenter also attached their drawings from before and after, saying it took a quite short time to go from rudimentary scribblings to full-fledged detailed realistic drawings. So perhaps these books help, though I’ve got a feeling they might be about drawing from references.

          The same is true if I was going to try to describe the minutia in the painting - what color is the officer’s hair? Are any of the characters wearing glasses? What do the wrinkles in their clothes look like? What kind of shoes are they wearing?

          I’m not really an artist, but for myself I resolved this problem by making decisions like that when I come around to those details. I.e. I’ll choose the fitting shoes when it’s time to draw the shoes. And of course, sketching is for planning this kind of stuff before drawing proper begins.

          • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I’ve seen a recommendation for the books ‘Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain’ by Betty Edwards and ‘The Creative License: Giving Yourself Permission to Be The Artist You Truly Are’ by Danny Gregory.

            I’ll give this a look! Thanks for the recommendation!

            I’m not really an artist, but for myself I resolved this problem by making decisions like that when I come around to those details. I.e. I’ll choose the fitting shoes when it’s time to draw the shoes. And of course, sketching is for planning this kind of stuff before drawing proper begins.

            I don’t think I’m really explaining the problem well, but like… If I don’t have a visual reference, I just can’t imagine (or draw) what the minute details actually look like in those situations. An artist might be able to take a side-profile picture of a shoe and visualize what that would look like if it was a front or back or diagonal viewpoint, and draw it into their scene. I know what a shoe looks like… I can describe one, I know a shoe when I see one obviously, but when it comes to needing a level of detail sufficient to actually draw the lines - to know where the next line should go - I come up blank. I can draw something and recognize that it doesn’t look like what I want, but it’s difficult to actually identify what it is that I do want unless I stumble on it.

            I can draw very low-detail things. Stick figures, say, or basic outlines, but the details come very hard to me.

            • [object Object]@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              The person who recommended those books said they ‘teach how to draw what you see instead of what the brain tells you to draw’. Which is a bit odd, and I don’t know if they meant drawing from references specifically, but it kinda sounds like it might help with capturing an object how it should look. Especially since their ‘after’ example was a detailed drawing of a crow down to the feathers.

              I’m actually simultaneously intrigued and a bit wary of these books, since I prefer unrealistic and quirky style and want to develop one like that for myself, but am afraid I might go for detailed looks if I learn to do that.

              • harmbugler@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 days ago

                What Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain teaches you is to draw how an object does look. I’m probably a 4 on the scale and can draw because of this book. One of the memorable techniques is to take a photograph, turn ti upside down and draw it that way. Then, turn your drawing upside and see what you got. By making the image a bit confusing, you can focus on the lines and shading your eyes see, and not ‘a man in a chair’ your mind sees.

      • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        I have aphantasia as well but I do actually have something sort of like a memory palace… kinda. It should be completely useless when I’m awake, but isn’t. I have a dream town, and every place I’ve dreamed about more than three times in the last ~20 years is there in a surprisingly consistent and exceptionally vivid way, like logging into a mmorpg, but spawning in random places. If not for it being easily recognizable as “my town”, I’d struggle to tell it from waking reality because that’s the only other time I experience “sight”. It’s genuinely unsettling sometimes, when my brain makes a new place, to not know if I was dreaming. Maybe that’s why I revisit places until they feel comfortable and familiar and get incorporated into the town.

        I say it isn’t completely useless because I use spacial memory to “go places” when awake. I can’t see it, but I know what’s there if I go there, the same way I can mentally count the windows, and know what’s around them, in my house without visually touring the house; I think about where I go to open windows on a nice day, and count the stops.

        I can’t put things into the town purposely. Locations or objects, unfortunately. Everything has to already be there if I want to make use of it. But if I can find a useful thing on my spacial tour, I can make note of where I found it, or move it to somewhere more useful. Like the finding the windows exercise, but, to continue your example, I happen to recall that next to window 3 is a Christmas cactus with pink heart-shaped flower buds, and I choose to ”move it” it to the 7th window of my tour. (And yes, if I make note that I’ve moved something, it does stay there when I dream, so that’s really neat)

        Genuinely not that useful for things people probably normally use a memory palace sort of thing for, like short-term memories, (finding useful objects is difficult, and sometimes requires a lot of in-dream exploring, which takes actual time) but somewhat useful for certain long-term things, like numbers or recipes. And as a bonus, when I forget something, I’ll often stumble across it in my town and be reminded. Like the recipe for my mom’s cheesecake is the literal ingredients just sitting on the counter in the pocket floor she lives in (she’s a nightmare I had often enough to join the town’s residents, but I shoved her in an impossible floor so I can avoid her). I put that recipe there because I like to modify it, and I often forget what the base recipe is. It’s not written down in the normal sense because I’ll lose it, but it’s simple enough for a representation like that to be easy to hold onto.

        But I’ve had similar frustrating experiences with people telling me to visualize things for whatever reason. Like nope, my internal computer is GUI-free. Text output only, with a screen reader. Not even multiple voices, which I hear is a thing most people can do, just the one default reader voice.

        On the subject of not being able to visualize people, if there’s someone you haven’t seen in a long time, do you falsely match other people up with the description? For example, my mom died when I was 23, and I’m almost 40 now. It’s been so long that I genuinely don’t remember what she looks like unless I’m looking at a photo. But I know her general description, and when I see other women who fit the description I -feel- that they look just like her even though they usually don’t, actually.

      • shalafi@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        Good heavens! I learned about the memory palace in a Hannibal Lector book, thought it was genius, assumed everyone could do that.

      • [object Object]@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        I’ve been told on Reddit that people with aphantasia can actually do the ‘memory palace’ thing. But, since it was just one commenter who didn’t quite describe how it would work, while I myself can visualize but dislike the ‘palace’ technique, I have no further information as to how to do it.

    • PineRune@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’m basically the opposite. I can remember peoples faces very well but have a hell of a hard time trying to remember their names. I’d say I’m a 1 or 2 on this scale, depending imon if I’m fully engaged with the content (like reading a book).

    • hperrin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      I’d never really connected my lack of a mind’s eye with my inability to follow unnamed characters through a movie until you just said that. 🤯

    • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      You think apple and (apparently) ‘see’ an apple. I think apple and it’s like thinking of how you’d describe an apple. It’s red, it’s round. It has a stem. It’s juicy. It tastes good… but I can’t see it. Or anything else. They’re just thoughts

      I think I’m a one, but I might be a five and I can’t tell, because how do I know what format my brain uses to tell me apple? I just know that it does.

      I can imagine tastes well enough to cook pretty well and can often predict what a dish will taste like with pretty good accuracy ( I just recently saw a recipe for chocolate rosemary banana bread, and I could imagine that combination, even though I’d never had it before), so there are clearly some senses I can do it for. I think I can also do it visually, but I can’t exactly print it out, so I just know that I’ve received the thought.

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        If you close your eyes and focus on an apple, what do you see? My understanding is that people without aphantasia / who are “1s” can actually see an image of the apple, as though they were looking at it. If you just see black, no image at all, you might be a 5.

        • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I think I’m overthinking this, but I can’t tell how you would know that you’re seeing it. I think I see it if I try, but my natural inclination is more like I know the apple’s there but I’m not looking at it.

          Bizarrely, I am sure that I can “see” aspects of the apple, because that’s how I’m trying to focus on seeing it. Like, I can see the dimple where the stem connects and the curve of the apple with natural color variation for the part of the apple that I can see, but if I try to zoom out, it’s back to awareness of the apple.

          I think I’m overthinking it, because I can “see” approximations of the apple variations in this post, but maybe it’s because they’re two dimensional.

          • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            It’s possible that you’re a 3 or a 4. My understanding is that people who are 1s can see the apple as though it was there in front of them. They can rotate the image in their minds, break it in half and examine the insides, see the seeds and the veins on the leaf and the discoloration near the stem. Zooming in or out isn’t problematic at all.

            If you’re a 5, you can certainly be aware of these things - that they’re features of an apple - but if you really focus on seeing the apple - as though with your eyes, rather than just thinking about the features of the apple as qualitative properties - you can’t do it. It’s just blackness.

            • idiomaddict@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              I’m not sure what difference this makes, but I can see snapshots of each of those, just not video. Though if I imagine biting into an apple, I can get all the senses together.

              I think I might have just been trying to isolate sight from the other senses, because the only real experience I have with only the sight of apples is in pictures, so it being automatically 2d does make sense.

              They can rotate the image in their minds, break it in half and examine the insides, see the seeds and the veins on the leaf and the discoloration near the stem.

              Yeah, checking now, I can see those things as well as long as I’m also feeling, hearing, and smelling them.

              Thank you! I first learned about this a while ago and I’ve occasionally wondered about it. I don’t think I would have figured it out without you talking me through it.

              • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 days ago

                You’re welcome! It’s a topic I find intriguing, and it’s always interesting to discuss the different ways people experience these things, now that I realize we’re not all the same. :)

    • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      So you never have sexual fantasies? If somebody asks you to describe how something looks, how are you able to do it? Can you at least remember the colors red and blue?

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        4 days ago

        I have sexual fantasies, but they’re more like reading erotica than watching porn.

        I imagine I describe things just like I expect others do, except that instead of having a catalogue of pictures to reference, I have a filing cabinet of documents with descriptions of those things. The concept of a ‘photographic memory’ is completely foreign to me. If I’m walking down the street and I see someone get mugged, then I get asked about it later, I can recall and recite the things I specifically took notice of in the moment, but if I want to be able to give a description of e.g. what the person was wearing or what color their hair was, I need to consciously observe those things and commit them to memory at the time. As I understand it, some folks can just recall the event and ‘replay’ it in their mind, and recall things they might not have taken direct notice of originally; I definitely can’t do that.

    • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      I subconsciously assign actor’s faces to characters and watch as the book rolls on.

      But aren’t you visualizing the assigned character’s face? I think we all have varying amounts of this depending on what it is. It sounds like you can visualize faces, but not spaces.

      Edit: I see you say further down that you have a difficult time with facial recognition.

      Everyone’s brain does such wildly different things.

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        It sounds like you can visualize faces, but not spaces.

        Can’t visualize faces at all; I think you pulled that quote from a different post. ;)

        The thing to remember, though, is that… I didn’t even know this was something that I “couldn’t do” until it was pointed out to me that others can do it. I just assumed everyone else was being metaphorical when they said they “visualized something” in their head, or whatever. So whereas you hear it and think “Oh gosh, these people can’t do this very normal thing! That must be awful!”, to us, it’s more like we’ve just been living our lives as normal and then 30+ years in, we discover that most people have a superpower that we don’t have.

        • shalafi@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          But is it a superpower if the ability hadn’t been called out until the 21st century? That’s what kicks my ass. We can be so radically different, on what to me is a fundamental cognitive skill, yet it doesn’t make enough of a difference that the ancients didn’t figure it out three thousand years ago!

          • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Thoughts are a weird thing to describe. I bet it just never really occurred to anyone to discuss specifically what they see in their head when they think of a thing - everyone just assumed what they saw was the same thing everyone saw.

            It’s like the theory that the color you see as green might not be the same color I see as green - how do you actually determine that?