/lit/ - Literature

This comes up all the time on here in the poetry threads where people say they have to YELL poetry aloud in order to appreciate how it sounds.

>>19971044
>he subvocalizes
I shiggy dig.

But in all seriousness if you cant think both nonverbally and with a monologue you are defective

>>19971044
In a antiquity, one always read aloud (yeah I know the few instances of silent reading like Dio Chrysostom reading Euripides).

>>19971044
>this dude subvocalizes EVERYTHING and considers it to be something that makes him a non-NPC
OH MY FUCKING GOD
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>>19971059
Agreeed. Math, logic and philosophy are better read and written nonverbally. Poetry and prose are better when subvocalized.

>>19971044
i do this to read fast when i dislike the text, like a fast forward button, but i usually read normally

>>19971044
Stream-of-consciousness writing proves these people wrong or they are just being willfully ignorant.

The NPC meme is so horribly abused. This one guy got really mad about my pro-littering philosophy posts and told me "no one with an inner monologue would litter".

Yeah it really takes a lot of deep soul searching to follow the rules that got your booty spanked when you broke them as a child, retard.

>>19971173
While there definitely are people without (notable) inner thought, I'm willing to bet the retards in the OP image were just blindly seething about the 'meanie alt-right meme' without any tangible takes on it. You see this here all the time, people get pissed off at something and make a random attempt at a 'gotcha' without stopping to consider what the are actually saying and the other angles it plays into.

>>19971059
You cannot read a language nonverbally. If you rely on pure memorization to map a word directly to the concept you are indeed a computer and not a human being. Even moonrunes are learned when you understand how the radicals form the words instead of memorizing your ankis like a NPC.

>>19971059
Everyone thinks nonverbally. The "inner monologue" is just the part of thinking that gets pushed to the top. In many ways, it is the least meaningful form of thought.

>>19971044
can people that are born deaf and blind have inner voice?

>>19971229
No, that's why they're called "deaf and dumb".

i dont get it
everyone has an inner monologue

>>19971177
based, I'm littering sympathetic myself but I support you all the way

>>19971215
I didnt say you could read a language nonverbally, I made a distinction between subvoclization and more "automatic" reading, though this may be more of a spectrum than a dichotomy. I said you can think nonverbally, eg imagining objects visually, or weighing emotions, or logically working out a pattern, etc.
>>19971221
Internal monologue is something you can have accompanying nonverbal thought or not. It can be beneficial to reason something out deliberately in words sometimes; other times it is better to do without an actual monologue. Some people apparently dont have a monologue at all, ever.

>>19971243
Ascend.

>>19971248
I'm relatively sure they do have some kind of inner speech but they don't have the brainpower to make themselves aware of it.

>studies show leftists are more prone to mental illness
>studies shown leftists are more likepy to exhibit dark triad
>studies show women find leftists less attractive
>studies show leftists' moral heat map to be so widespread as to treat other groups, species and even non living entities as more valuable than their own immediate relatives
>now studies are showing leftists have no inner monologue

Jesus christ why do these people exist.

>>19971229
iirc Helen Keller didn't until her teacher managed to break the communication barrier and build up a library of abstract concepts I think she was 6-7 years old when that happenerd.

>>19971259
forgot this one

>studies show brain damage makes you leftist

>>19971253
For me at least internal monologue is something I have to consciously do usually. Random phrases or words flit around in my mind alongside thought, but to make a coherent directed monologue of actual sentences following a train of thought, I have to do that "on purpose". Its exactly like writing actually, just writing in your mind.

>>19971259
>>studies show leftists are more prone to mental illness
maybe because in any other political system people with mental illness get burned?
fuck off chud you're being a righty on an anime image board

>>19971259
>studies show this anon is a faggot

>>19971261
how the fuck would they know if hellen keller had an inner monologue

>>19971177
Why are you pro littering?

I am anti littering because I don't like seeing litter in my environment.

>>19971266
I always see people draw conclusions like so. Is this something you are confident in or do you have reservations but choose not to voice them to maximize the propagandistic effect?

>>19971285
Because Helen Keller recalled not having one?

>>19971275
Trans women are women, TERF. Go back to /pol/

>>19971285
How could a deaf person have an inner monologue anon. Maybe she could "think in braille" or something

Then again isnt there some suspicion that HK is kind of a meme and may not actually have been that lacking in senses?

>>19971295
She described that period as blur of sensations or something along those lines.

>>19971295
what they were like "helen do you have an inner monologue" and she was like "oabhlahainipaienoobaraga" and they were like "6, you say?"

>>19971282
>casual homophobia.

KYS you alt right nazi

>>19971311
Are you acting retarded on purpose? I'm just gonna assume you are actually retarded:
She told people about the fact after she had developed language skills.

>>19971259
>>studies shown leftists are more likely to exhibit dark triad
>>studies show women find leftists less attractive
Aren't these contradictory according to /pol/?

>>19971259
Overpopulation, there's now more human bodies than souls to go around.

>>19971332
The less attractive study was(a likely unreplicable meme study) based on physical attractiveness in face and body. The dark triad thing is about behavior, though apparently psychopathy and narcissism show up in facial structure somewhat. It's all rather vague and inexact.

>>19971177
Im anti litter because why the hell would you want your home to look like Tiawana? Im fine with biodegradable goods (plant peels, eggsheels, cardboard) but plastics and glass? You have to be retarded to think thats a good thing.
>Trash sweepers gotta sweep right?
The point is to get trash OFF the streets and into their proper disposal bins you nunce.

>>19971327
was that before or after she learned to tapdance

>>19971332
Has the average /pol/tard been bothered by an internal contradiction even once in their life?

>>19971286
It is explained at length in the image >>19971249

>>19971342
>Tiawana
You misspelled the name of a foreign city, therefore all your arguments are discarded. Littering wins again!

>>19971351
nvm, just remembered le jew conspiracy is the secret cure to all cognitive dissonance

>>19971342
>The point is to do what your mommy told you
>Tiawana
NPC

>>19971332
Being found attractive (in a fucking survey) and actually getting laid are two very different things.

>>19971376
Yes

>>19971376
You aren't even mentally capable of considering whether le jew conspiracy is plausible so I wouldn't talk.

>>19971376
I remember a thread on /pol that simply stated something like "If globohomo destroys nations why is gay marriage legal in Israel?" What followed was a 300 post thread in which /pol convinced itself that the Jews are so sneaky that they Jewish subversion themselves. It was incredible.

>>19971421
Gay marriage is only partially legal in Israel, if you want to get a gay marriage you have to get it in a foreign country and then the government will recognize it. Their status as a secular state with theocratic characteristics makes it so weddings are only performed by religious organizations and they basically wouldn't do that shit anyway.

The real redpill is understanding that Israel is a balanced state with cooperation between liberals and conservatives for a common goal, they don't meaningless squabbles get out of hand. This is what they want to deny America so that we remain under the control of retarded death cults who keep us so wrapped up in things that we don't fix obvious problems, like the money we waste supporting Israel every year.

>>19971514
It's more complicated than that. The people actually calling the shots are a very small group who dont necessarily about the masses of their own race that much. It is also likely that they have insane messianic religious beliefs driving some of their behavior. The whole dynamic is very complex.

>>19971526
>The whole dynamic is very complex.
This is just a truism, of fucking course. No country is guided by an actual creed, everything is an un-negotiated blending of ideas and cultures.

>>19971606
Well people dont seem to understand the concept of a conscious elite conspiracy(or conspiracies) arising out of a mass of people who are not consciously conspiring, but who do have an innate and/or cultural disposition towards tribal cooperation at the expense of out groups, and how this elite interacts with the masses from which it emerges. Nor do they understand how such a dynamic interacts with other elements of the societ(ies) the group lives in.

>>19971177
Die in a fire.

>>19971259
Now do IQ

>>19971059
This anon has it right. Here's the real question though: How did a term that was intended to be a direct criticism of mindless groupthink and people with virtually no independent agency get turned into a banal argument about standardizing thought formats?

>>19971630
have sex

>>19971645
I agree, the two have nothing to do with each other. NPCs are categorized based on a completely unthinking adherence to authority and social conformity. Whether you use language to think most of the time is just not relevant, maybe it correlates or something but that's just speculation. Then again it's not like there is an official definition of npc, so it's unsurprising the term now has multiple definitions.

>>19971177
littering is a melanistic trait

>>19971249
i like how the chad meme basically amounts to "be a nigger"

>>19971378
my mom told me to litter though?

>>19971667
This is correct, and desperately simping with useless chores for people who wouldn't lift a finger for you is a pasty whyte boi trait.

>>19971674
Give me your mom's phone number

>>19971725
This attitude is why certain cities are clean and others are dumps. The cleanest people arent whites anyway, its Japs

>>19971665
I think it's possible it relates, because if sensory thought relates to creativity and imagination, it seems plausible that severe lack of individuality would also imply a lack of imagination and creativity. However it's still a tangent. I interpret the criticism of non-individuality in the meme was so uncomfortable to the demographic being criticised, and their controllers, that they (consciously or unconsciously) leveraged their significant control over public discourse in order to derail the topic into something comparatively harmless. They dodged the argument.

>>19971668
>niggers do whatever they want and make no effort to support themselves or create anything
>wypipo fucking trip over each other sprinting to be the first one to clean up the mess, pat them on the head, give them some free money and tell them it's not their fault

sounds like they've got shit figured out, it's like that cliche joke where aliens visit earth and determine housecats have enslaved humanity

>>19971740
This whole country is a dump, picking the plastic off the ground only has the effect of making it easier for normalfags to pretend it isn't.

>>19971765
How long has this been going on though , maybe 60 years? I cant imagine its going to be a long term pattern, given the entire rest of human history.

>>19971777
So you understand this but think the solution is to just pick up litter with even more fervor? Interesting how the midwit's mind operates

>>19971777
Idk about the rest of human history, I kind of only exist right now.

>>19971785
I'm not talking about solutions, I'm saying the current scenario is not very likely to endure.

I refuse to believe that people don't have an "internal monologue". People just don't understand what others mean when they say, "can you talk to yourself in your head".

>>19971787
This. The idea that you benefit from the betterment of the human race or """society""" beyond your actual 'share' in it is a gay meme used to lead around otherwise intelligent people on a leash. There's only any validity to it when it has to do with your progeny, and the main basis of this angst is an inability to have a family so it's a moot point.

>>19971795
>water is wet
Yeah thanks for letting me know, faggot.

>>19971044

>>19971819
Well you said they have it figured it out. Apart from only 40 million out of 1 billion of them living in america where this is true, its actually still not true, they still make their own neighborhoods unlivable.

Conceptual fluid thinker here. Vocalized thought is retard tier and is inferior in all ways.

>>19971835
That wasn't me but you're still taking an autistic cope approach to this.
>they'll regret this when we finally die out!!!
yeah okay faggot

>>19971850
They regret it right now, they live in awful conditions. Getting some welfare from yt is hardly a good life

>>19971856
I don't even know how a person could reach this level of cope

>>19971864
I forgot everyone aspires to live in a Detroit ghetto, my cope prevented me from seeing ths

>>19971044
For me It's not even "reading" with an inner monologue. Like I don't hear someone's voice reading the material to me. I construct the entire scene that I am reading. It's basically like watching a movie in my head. I envision what the characters look and sound like. It can be a bit distracting if I read a book and then watch a movie made about it as the actor/actress they use for the character rarely matches up with what I felt they looked like.

>>19971259
you can't be an NPC and have mental illness by definition

>>19971177
>>19971243
>>19971286
>>19971342
>>19971633
>>19971667

Whenever I piss in a bathroom I know I'm unlikely to return to anytime soon, I walk into the stall, place toilet paper everywhere, including all over the walls, floors and basin, and then piss in giant arcs all over it. My piss is rancid and utterly coats the entire public restroom. I piss on the taps, in the wastebins, all over and up into the hand-dryer, and, if possible, into any cleaning supplies. Then I leave, content in the seething I will never see.

>>19972183
I disagree. Many of them have a mental illness pertaining to their actual 'life' but avoid thinking when it comes to anything vaguely political (defined broadly, including the political of social relationships).

Plus, animals can have mental illnesses and they don't have inner monologues.

>>19972260
based

>>19972260

>>19972260
I have an inner monologue but I can tell that it is much weaker than yours

>>19971352
Amusing, how it takes pride in being a subhuman.

>>19972314
I'll never get over how much people (let alone people on 4chan) seethe at the mere mention ot littering.

>>19972322
The shopping cart test is the litmus test of humanity and littering is similar

>>19971173
There arent actually people without an inner monologue. Well there may be a few, very low iq individuals, but the people you see on twitter saying they have no inner monologue just have a misunderstanding. They think its meant to be an actual voice inside their head, not sub-vocalized thoughts. Like the aphantasia niggers. They think they are meant to have an open eye hallucination of an apple...

The only time my thoughts become language is when I’m verbalizing them, wouldn’t thinking in words be slow? Even if it’s just a sort of summary, why do you need it if you’re already thinking it? Reading with it seems even worse, your reading speed is limited by the speed of your inner voice??

>>19972322
It triggers people because they have empathy. They’re putting themselves in the shoes of the person who needs to use the bathroom (or worse, clean up the mess) after you. Someone who rejects empathy is refusing to consider the “other” - and by publicly stating it, they’re painting themselves as the other.

Which is why people get to treat them like despicable faggots who aren’t worthy of personhood. It’s literally what they want.

>>19972403
You might have limited empathy, but I have empathy, individuality, and also contempt. Therefore I can imagine what it's like to be you, but I also maintain recognition that I'm not, and better than, you, and take joy in the image of you suffering.

This is just the intellectual difference of an NPC and a non-NPC. You empathize by depersonalizing, forgetting the difference between you and others. You cannot, however, empathize with a being of greater intellect like myself, creating the false dichotomy of "person" and "non-person" (which is just a person you can't comprehend due to being too distinct from yourself), while I can empathize with a person who I antagonize while still enjoying that antagonism. This shows that you are intellectually limited and I am not. As the character Hyoudou Kazutaka once said "He feels pain, but I do not."

>>19971275
>anime image board
Yeah? Japanese culture is considerably more conservative than western Hollyjew crap, I don't know what point you think you're making beyond alluding to the "pokeymans is satan" soccermom crap

>>19972502
They aren't really comparable. The Japanese aren't christian and our conservative culture is centered around religion

>>19972510
That's a fair point, but they clearly value and idealize things like traditional masculinity and femininity in their media significantly more than American culture does. They're fairly comfortable in celebrating their traditional culture and their history rather than constantly denigrating and demonizing it like the West does.

>>19972486
But you’re not. And therein lies your problem.

>>19972486
Interesting image anon, would you care to elaborate on the meaning of the juice box and its relation to your post

>>19971044
I have both and inner voice, I imagine the scenes happening in fiction books (I even get creative with the camera angles, POV), and I also have a dynamic imagination (mostly like videos but I can imagine stills too) am I based?

>>19972577
I have both visual imagination and inner voice*

>>19972392
The shopping cart meme is redditor cringe

>>19972686
t. not human

>>19972555
Please substantiate your assertions, anon.

>>19972562
I wanted a counterculture gigachad image but schizochad didn't really suit the bill.

>>19972403
You could think this if you had the petty mind of a woman. Everyone in any society either directly or indirectly supports real violence without batting an eye, human beings were not meant to be moralfags who lose their minds with guilt over ever tiny issue they cause others. The miniscule amount of empathy we have should be saved for more important things than jokes about littering.

No one with a brain believes you are anything close to a good person in real life. You're a self-obsessed retard who uses empty moral issues as an excuse to claim you are better than others.

>>19972709
>brown person when exposed to extremely basic high trust norms
Lmao

>>19972562
I took the point as one similar to this

>>19972396
This. People think that when you talk about seeing images in your mind you actually mean seeing them, as when you're dreaming, when it's more like thinking in the concept of it and its properties. When I "see" a red apple in my mind what I'm doing is thinking in the concept of "apple" and "red" and linking them.

>>19972714
We all know you don't live in a high trust society, if you did you wouldn't be sperging out about all of these meme issues. Also you faggots always forget that back during these "golden ages" for your trad fantasies, everyone threw their wrappers on the ground and no one picked up their dog shit. The serious opposition to these things started in the 1970's.

>>19972736
In the golden days Jews were literally expelled from the country for 4 centuries you wouldn't understand

>>19972733
Nah, I can see images in my brain. It's different than normal vision and it's sort of ethereal but I can see it.

If I understand you correctly, you might actually be stupid.

>>19972748
keep saying random words, faggot

>>19972733
No you actually do see it in your head, kind of like a dream, but it's hard to explain. Like imagine a cube in your head, now imagine slowly rotating it, you can see it turning

the whole inner voice thing was great, plebs outed themselves as being subvocalizers

>>19972704
You don’t substantiate axioms, you dullard.

>>19972709
Bruh, you need to chill the fuck out. I’m not talking about my opinion, I hate everything and everyone lol. I’m explaining to this idiot why people are cool with treating self-assigning subhumans as subhumans.

>>19972757
No, what you're actually doing is thinking in the concept of a "cube" and applying to it the concept of "rotating", but you don't see it in the same way you see something with your eyes.

>>19972733
You don’t need to have hyperphantasia to see dreamlike images.

>>19972805
I can literally see it rotating. I can make any sort of little movie like that in my head that I want. Have you ever have a tune stuck in your head? It's a bit like how you can "hear" that in your head

>>19972766
Am to understand that this means they sort of sound things out in their head? They can't "auto read"?

I hadn't really thought about this before but I guess there is a huge difference between how I read when I'm running my eyes over something simple (basically no 'noise' at all, it just pops into my brain whether or not I want to) versus how I read a meaningful book when I've hit a confusing point and want to get back to basics to work it out. Maybe I'd read faster/or better if I tried to handle my actual book reading like the first example, not hone in so much.

>>19972803
Your writing style sincerely makes you come off like a moron.

>>19972824
You're covetous because you can't see a black man expressing himself better than you lol.

>>19972805
>No, what you're actually doing
You're projecting your own retardation onto smarter people. I absolutely can see both memories and invented things in my mind. Again, they're sort of ethereal. It's not a 'projector' or some nonsense and it's largely the same with my eyes closed, it's almost like a different plane of existence. I can't stop and look directly at it, but I definitely see it.

I'm sure this is gibberish to you since you have an IQ of 80.

>>19972824
I’m sorry, are you the dunce anon, or the blind anon? Can’t tell if I should be calling you out on btfo, or hitting you with that “no u”

>>19972832
I've been called a nigger half a dozen times in this thread lol

>>19972846
I'm the pro-littering chud

>>19972856
Oh, damn.. well then, I happily accept your roundabout submission, lol

>>19971668
Nigmaxxing is what Varg advocates. Life off welfare and have a ton of children.

>>19972832
I was the guy calling people brown for littering and I'm white and litter

>>19972842
>they're sort of ethereal
Yes, you're thinking of the concept of those ideas and memories, but you aren't actually seeing them.

>>19972863
We honestly can't understand what the fuck you're saying

>>19971259
>>studies show

>>19972870
So if I say "hot naked lady" there isn't an image that appears in your head? You can't in some capacity use it in the way you would an actual picture of a naked lady?

>>19972867
extremely based

>>19972870
But it's not a concept. The movie in your head can literally surprise you, like you imagine a tree and you climb up the tree and suddenly theres a knot, you didnt plan for there to be a knot but there it is, then you look down a branch and see sun glinting through leaves or something, then maybe look down and the earth is brown and theres no grass right around the tree. Random stuff

>>19971259
It's unironically bioleninism. Leftists are an unholy alliance between sociopaths and the scrap from the bottom of the barrel. If you're a sociopath you have no qualms in using useless people to get power, even if it fucks over the competent people. And if you're useless, you will support whoever offers you power, because you know you can't achieve anything on your own merit.

>>19972887
I'm terrified at the concept that this guy might actually have to stop and work really hard to come to terms with the meaning of "red apple". He might just be a pedantic retard who read some pop-psychology article and took it too literally, or a troll, but it's a horrifying thought.

>>19972871
:) cope

>>19972939
Are you also the guy who said he can't picture a red apple in his head?

>>19972895
No it’s called aphantasia. Simply a different way of handling data.
Just because you have a fuckin 4K tv in your head doesn’t mean that everyone else does.

>>19972803
>he calls that an axiom
Ooof, sorry to hear that anon.

>>19972951
So you admit that you are a fucking moron who is in the bottom ~20% of intelligence and you were projecting your monkey brain's traits onto us.

>>19971059
>>19971044

I read with a voice in my head, but I think without a voice in my head, unless I'm remembering something or imagining a dialogue.

>>19972945
No, I actually have decent visualisation. Not hyperreal, at least not to the extent I’ve heard about, but I can construct entire fantastical scenes that are indistinguishable from visual memory.

Funnily enough, I usually catalogue real memories based on feel, as opposed to optics. So, there we go.

>>19972958
Yep. Every single person agrees that that thing isn’t smarter than them.

>>19972965
Literally what

>>19972970
My visualization is not that great, and also it tends to progress in kind of fever dream directions unless I try fairly hard to make it do a specific thing.

>>19972982
If you don't have visualization, you're a moron. Bottom of the barrel. Way worse than simply lacking an inner monologue.

>>19972992
How did you work that one out?

>>19973005
It's a basic trait of intelligence you fucking retard

>>19973012
Based on what? Go on, you fucking cludge; I’m giving you the stage, open minded, asking you to explain how the fuck you’ve arrived at the conclusion (lack of visualisation = low intelligence).

Are there really people that can't imagine any sensory phantom at will, including multiple senses simultaneously, and also think intuitively?

>>19973026
Only someone this retarded could not se the connection. It is an essential function of the brain. Without it and inner speech you're basically just a animal going around instinctively reacting to things without any capacity to model out different scenarios and reassess things.

>>19973027
>and also think intuitively
Sarcasm or no, what the fuck are you trying to express?

>>19973051
Subjective and/or non-sensory thought. Sensory thought is better for scrutinizing smaller things in detail while subjective thought is better for big picture thinking or fast calculation. I don't see why a person would only use one type of thought process all the time.

>>19973076
I usually call this "abstract" thought. I've noticed that it's always accompanied by faint hints of language and sense though.

>>19973042
Oh yeah? Such an essential part of the brain that many people with aphantasia don’t notice it well into adulthood? Damn, it’s amazing how they managed to live at all, being outwardly and self-reflectively indistinguishable from us superior, phantasmagorical beings. Poor cripples!
> without any capacity to model out different scenarios
You’re retarded and don’t understand aphantasia. Kinda ironic that you’re guilty of the exact same shit you’re accusing them of.

>>19973081
You realize how pathetic that all sounded, right? I can tell you are legitimately hurt by this and thus you can only resort to empty sarcasm to protect your ego.

>>19973076
I think anyone with intelligence is basically running all these kinds of thought at once whether or not they want to.

>>19973097
I think the guy is correct anon. Visualizing stuff in your head simply doesnt matter than much. You can still reason about things abstractly

>>19971044
literally how a conscience works...no wonder theyre so fucking useless with anything regarding self awareness/bettering others

>>19973097
> ad hominem
I accept your tacit admittance of duncery.
And for the record, my vitriol isn’t because of any disability (I can picture shit just fine), I’m just passionate about my hate for self aggrandising faggots who refuse to think outside the box.

>>19973080
I pretty much attribute that to what >>19973103 says. Some tasks are just more dominant in one type of thought than the other. Which type of thought people identify with the most is probably just a matter of lifestyle, completely lacking one side seems absurd like atrophying one's critical thinking into nothing but somehow being a functional human anyway. At worst you just have someone that's always abstract-dominant or sensory-dominant out of habit.

>>19973128
This has to be bait

>>19973184
No, I genuinely think you’re a faggot.

>>19973128
You called it a disability.

>>19973128
>I’m just passionate about my hate for self aggrandising faggots who refuse to think outside the box.
Not so passionate as to try to stop being one yourself, clearly.

>>19973343
It is, if you want to go by the literal definition, but it’s technically not recognised as “a disability” (due to having fuck all practical effect on how people function).

>>19973355
> “no u”
We’ve peaked.

>>19971044
Not being able to subvocalize is a sign of retardation

>>19973371
>It is, if you want to go by the literal definition, but it’s technically not recognised as “a disability” (due to having fuck all practical effect on how people function).
If you meant it in the literal sense in the context of your sentence, the word would be inability. Disability carries the connotation of, well, disabilities.
The only point you've made is that people function practically without visualization. But people with a variety of serious externally visible disabilities can function practically. The original point you were responding to was about intelligence.

>>19973398
Oh, fair point on the inability thing. But my argument was against the idea that phantasia is
> an essential function of the brain
, which is how that plank justified his conclusion.

>>19971098
This post has finally allowed me to understand what the fuck subvocalizing is. It's what I do when I read poetry. For fuck's sake

>>19971044
Most of the time I just move my tongue with my mouth closed as if I were talking while reading, I dont like it because it dries out my mouth and forces me to inhale because I slowly pushed all my air out as Im reading which is annoying.
It takes a conscious effort to mentally read and comprehend words with JUST my mind and no minor tongue movements.
It could be that Ive just been reading wrong all along and now Im stuck between the two.

>>19971044
NPC is about blindly following "authoritative sources", like the Ministry of Truth

>>19971044
I don't really use my inner voice when reading I think? You just kinda feel the text

>>19971259
>studies show leftists' moral heat map to be so widespread as to treat other groups, species and even non living entities as more valuable than their own immediate relatives
Source, right now

>>19973598
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Heatmaps-indicating-highest-moral-allocation-by-ideology-Study-3a-Source-data-are_fig6_336076674

>>19973608
So liberals have a mental disposition that is essentially the opposite of what’s evolutionarily advantageous.
Hmm

>>19971059
>desperate npc cope

>>19971261
Nah I don't buy the Hellen Keller stuff.
I think she was just a retard

>>19972951
>Just because you have a fuckin 4K tv in your head doesn’t mean that everyone else does.

Everyone who is a real human being does.

>>19972892
>biolenin
t. chud
It's a fact leftists are more successful than righties in the hardest fields. Conservatives are a minority in academia. Even in STEM.

Are there really people who have all of their thoughts narrated? Like when you think it's cold outside do you hear a voice in your head say "wow it's cold!" That sounds pretty weird to me. I think it, but I don't hear the thought in my head.

>>19971056
no need to yell but reading out loud yes
bloom made that very clear

also memorize your favorite poems so you can drop them on hoochies at any given sunday at church

>>19973398
>Disability carries the connotation of, well, disabilities.
I'm starting to think you don't have an inner monologue either. Your language skills are shit-tier.

>>19974448
>kick people out or ostracize them for being right wing
>wow this institution is so left wing
Lol

I can't believe an actual NPC came into this thread and admitted to it and then threw a shitfit when people rightfully called him a retard.

>>19973669
I genuinely think she may not have been a real person.

>>19974449
That's not really what we're talking about. If you have that it's because you're a redditor who reads too many "I always knew I was special!" pre-teen novels and decided to ruin your life by training yourself to think like they are written.

An inner monologue is supposed to come and go at different times, you can't function properly if you never let yourself go on autopilot.

>>19973463
It's always such a treat when I meet someone who is just intelligent enough to describe their own unintelligence.

>>19974958
Very dickish thing to say

>>19974963
Are you aware that even *silently* reading aloud is not allowed in many serious academic settings? I recently took the LSAT and I knew I had to keep my mouth shut the whole time.

>>19972733
>>19972951
I'm scratching my head hard over this concept. How could you do just about anything other than menial labor without mental imagery?

I've been sitting here trying to make sense of this (using my own mental imagery, by the way, like trying to envision what things look like withing your mental POV), and it just defeats so many possible practices of thought. For example, can you come up with an image of what I might look like? Am I literally just words on a screen in your conception and you aren't playing a mental guessing game about me? This might be the basis of most soijakers, they genuinely can't process this dilemma without taking an actual image and placing it in relation to the person, and they're dumb enough to take it too heart and not feel like they're coping.

>>19971177
>pro littering
im curious. i mean i dont believe recycling does jack shit, especially when corporations blast through garbage like crazy. but i wouldnt go out and litter. i wanna hear that hot take buddy, no lie

>>19971177
I can never get behind littering
When I go to a restaurant, I put my plates and utensils in a stack that helps the waitress' job
If it's a restaurant where you return the tray to some specific area, I always clean after myself, I also push the chairs back under the tables
If I eat a candybar, I make sure the wrapper goes into a trash can

I sense a lack of discipline and utter lack of care for your fellow man, anyone that litters either has some god complex or they think they're a main character of the world
Wouldn't be surprising if they end up raping someone, abusing someone physically or molesting a child at some point in their life, because they have absolutely zero respect and care for anybody except for themselves and feel like only their whims should be catered to and everybody else is just a side character in their story.
My rule for life is that you're free to do whatever you want with yourself and the things you own, however, you have no right to lay a hand on another human being or their belongings.

My statements are not definite and I can be swayed to think a different way, given sufficient explanations. So shoot.

>>19974977
Go back and reread my post, I did mention (if you even read the whole thing) that my mouth is CLOSED and that Im just making the same movement with my tongue as if I were speaking, except my mouth is not open.
Stop being a pretentious fuck.
Post physique.

>>19971044
Socrates was mentally ill :(

>>19975044
Okay I'll level with you, I almost never actually litter and most the time I even put the shopping cart back. I'm not some faggot who walks hundreds of yards just to dispose of a cigar sticker but this is more of a thought exercise.

I have long believed that societies turn to shit when people start obsessing over petty issues that will never be solved completely no matter what. When you give vindictive people license to completely attack and dehumanize their neighbors, they will do it regardless of the validity of the reason. The end result is that people become more hot blooded and less socialized, and moral energy that could be spent on addressing things that actually matter is expended on meaningless bullshit.

America currently faces very serious issues but most people ignore them entirely or, at best, approach them in a casual manner. I'm talking about issues that end up killing huge numbers of people and ruining generations. Meanwhile, littering is this petty """problem""" that everyone knows will never go away entirely (the shopping cart thing is 10000x more petty, btw), but you see this absolutely insane level of seethe about it. Not just with sheltered faggots IRL, but people on 4chan who should be well aware of the bigger concerns out there. It is a fucking flytrap for people who might otherwise try to address the ways various powers are screwing us over.

Also there's a more 'artistic' element to it that is about exercising ownership of space. All these people sperging out about how it's (apparently) impossible to have casual outdoor get-togethers with your heckin' trad neighbors are missing out on a crucial point about why this is less common: everyone is really pedantic about rules. Lots of people are made uncomfortable by the idea of 'setting up' on some random piece of grass and will only support these events if you have a scheduled location and a plan to have an OCD clean up session afterwards, and of course their kids will come smeared in sunscreen and won't be allowed to chase each other with sticks. They have no concept of the world "belonging" to us and often won't even go off a hiking trail in a national forest.

>>19971287
It's confirmation bias, people hear things they like the sound of, even if they're not based on rational or factual information.
If someone doesn't like left leaning people, they're happy to read upon anything that reinforces their prior prejudices
However, the left as an entity is not something desirable, Theodore Kaczynski's manifesto raises some good points about the left.

>>19975153
Prosocial behavior correlates with other prosocial behavior.

>>19975110
If I was this much of a beta faggot I'd keep it to myself, but here you are spilling your guts about how you let reddit bully you into being a simp for waitresses who make more money than you.

>>19975161
Wow what a profound concept. We must be living in the most prosocial time of all then, not like the selfish dark ages in the 1950's when people had the nerve to drop paper on the ground.

>>19975179
Our government and the laws it imposes are not very prosocial at all, so no.

>>19971044
I only have an inner voice when I take adderal.

Its like Flowers for Algernon, its kinda disgruntling.

>>19975162
What makes me a beta faggot? Because I don't break bottles on the ground and throw wrappers and gum around?
I've never been to reddit
I simply do not wish to inconvenience other people
And no waitress makes even close the same money I do, it seems you have this preconceived notion that anybody you disagree with must be doing bad financially. Your wild assumptions do not serve you in life, not for short nor for long term.
Your insecurities are at full display.

>>19975181
Which is exactly what I'm saying. Worry about that instead of shopping carts.

>>19975153
I seriously want to see the suicide apartments you people live in
you throw your garbage around in public spaces, the environment you live in must be an absolute waste disposal
post us a picture, pretty please

>>19975190
I really hope this is a troll post, for your sake. I couldn't live with myself if I sounded like that.

>>19975200
The person who brings back the shopping cart is more likely to be ethical in every other aspect of life as well

>>19971234
lol

I don't understand how people with no inner monologue are still alive?

How have they not all had life-ending or life-altering accidents? How do they weigh up A vs B arguments for daily decisions?

Like
> I should really pay for new car brakes and tires next week instead of xyz, its the safer thing to do
> I should really get out of the shower, and turn the hotplate off just in case
> I should really go check the front doors locked. I can't say for certain I locked it

Just hundreds of A vs B decisions every day. I just can't understand how they make up their mind without making arguments for and against internally?

>>19971229
Yes but it's likely very different and not visible/audible

>>19975208
Even if that's true, you think that shaming people into doing it will make them fundamentally change? You don't think it'll just make them do this shit when they can't get away with not doing it, and repress their rage about it until it comes out in other situations? This is your plan for fixing America?

>>19975221
No I would never bother to shame anyone about it because it would accomplish nothing. It's just a test to see if they're subhuman.

>fixing America
Would require a lot of nukes

>>19971266
look at which part of the brain it is, too

>>19975212
I'm starting to think that most people are basically like that, they can't think so they just go by the default model they have. This is probably why so much money is spent on advertising, people like >>19972733 can't think for themselves so when someone links the concept (as he calls it) of Coca-Cola with the concept of "good" for him he thinks Coca-Cola is good, and buys it.

>>19975206
You're not answering any questions and you're just prancing around tossing shit and insults. Is this really how you pass your time? Have you ever stopped to question in how idiotic of a pursuit you're on?
>I couldn't live with myself if I sounded like that.
I used to be like you, seeking cheap giggles by agitating random people on the internet, then I grew up. Having genuine discussion is much more fruitful and satisfying than your pre-schooler notion of entertainment.

>>19975225
It's an absolutely retarded and reddit-tier test. Plenty of very white people don't religiously put the shopping cart back.

It's just as well though, I wouldn't hangout with you anyway.

>>19975200
No one worries for real about littering or the shopping carts. It is, however, such an easily fixable problem that the disdain shown by those unable to carry out those simple norms makes many question if such selfishness should be punished. Then again, you could argue any problem has a similar dimension in other’s peoples minds, but I don’t think it’s a viable comparison.

>>19975239
Mate, I laid out a completely original fucking manifesto and you responded with an effeminate blogpost about how cool you think you are for helping waitresses. There is no discussion to be had here.

>>19975241
Then those white people are subhuman
>I wouldn't hang you with you so there!
Lol

>>19975245
These are not easily fixable problems, don't know how you even got that idea. 50% of litter isn't even 'littered', it just gets blown out of garbage cans and so on. It is this moralized meme issue because it will never be ended and they can keep sniffing their farts over it until the end of time.

There absolutely are obsessed extremists about this, just the thread.

>>19975257
I said "very white", like good members of society who raise families and help their neighbors.

>>19971044
They don't read. That is why they are perfectly fine with the 200 character limit on Twitter.

>>19975260
Keep trying to rationalize why some places are filthy and others are clean

>>19975266
>literally cannot think past external appearances
The point of the shopping cart test is that it costs you nothing and there is no penalty for not doing so

>>19975269
Haven't I made it pretty clear that I don't care? Are you really so simpleminded that you see someone ranting about how they think littering is fine and you think it is just a different approach to your own value system that makes having no litter the most important thing? Retard.

Also, I live in a 95% white neighborhood with lots of open space. There is not much litter at all, some people (mostly outsiders) throw shit out the window as they drive by but I honestly don't care.

>>19975260
I see what you mean. And I agree about the litter being blown out of cans and so on. But you can’t argue purposefully littering is just moronic or edgy.
And by easy I mean “just take your shit to the nearest can”, not “improve the economy of this country”. Also I don’t know who obsesses over it although from your post >>19975153 it seems like American puritanism is still going strong.
I think it’s a regional problem.

>>19975275
Youd care if you lived somewhere that most people littered all the time. It seems you're just taking advantage of living among people better than you

>>19975272
>literally can't think people's actual impact on the lives of people they know in order to judge them by an easy test they'd never heard of that redditors invented because they know they can't meet any meaningful standards
yes

>>19975249
You didn't even read what I said if you think that I even implied how "cool it is to help waitresses"
Inconveniencing others for your own well-being makes you a subhuman.
Find a better pastime than your pointless "trolling" you retarded fuck, you're not immortal and you're wasting away in the worst possible way.

>>19975284
>if you raise a family and do things for your neighbors there is no way you're a bad person
The npc continually surprises me. You cant understand how these things benefit the person doing them?

>>19975283
>it's not fair for you to not get your panties in a wad about littering just because you never see littering!
okay

>>19975286
you are so soft, holy shit

>>19975294
You are so dumb I am starting to feel guilty about this.
>If it doesnt affect me then it isnt a problem
Just lol

>>19975292
This is just getting absurd. If you want to judge people on whether they sometimes leave the shopping cart for the paid attendant to get 60 seconds later instead of the choices that they make in their actual relationships, go ahead. It's clearly the only point you have to brag about so don't let me take it from you.

>>19975306
You understand you can raise a family while abusing them and appear perfectly respectable? Have you even developed object permanence?

>>19975298
>not wasting your emotional energy in a useless way is "dumb"
There is absolutely no rational reason for me to do that. I am quite happy to save my energy for real issues so I won't be an emotional wreck when they come up, like you.

>>19975310
Why dont you live in an area that is majority your own race btw?

>>19975308
>while abusing them
That clearly falls under "their choices in their personal relationships", you fucking retard. Under your model they'd still be a good person even if they abuse their kids so long as they put the shopping cart back.

It's very clear that you are a one-dimensional thinker who can't get over silly ideas that other people have pushed on you, and you cope by trying to insult the intelligence of others (and failing).

>>19975311
Next time you call me a nigger, show some confidence. I am white.

>>19971044
Huh so being able to think coherently makes you "crazy" even though critical thinking and coherency is what these types of people lack... It's almost like they want to discourage people for thinking to themselves or taking time to do us their thoughts on any certain topic hmmmmmm perhaps there is more to the npc meme than we realize. They are willingly admitting that they lack concious thought. So theoretically someone else is thinking for them. Which would really line up with all the tribalism and groupthink npcs experience. Yet perhaps these people just interpret the world in a different less efficient way like visually.

>>19975324
No, you idiot, abusing their families would make them bad. The shopping cart thing is a microcosm, an example something that doesnt really matter at all but shows a basic disposition. Obviously if you had to for some reason choose one or the other the abuse is vastly more important.

>>19971332
Dark triad personality traits are a meme, just be good looking, tall and not autistic and retarded

>>19975337
Then I'm quite glad that my sweet mother has chosen to nurture me and, instead of abusing me, vent her frustrations by occasionally not putting the shopping cart back. It's a shame yours dropped you your head but at least she passes the cart test.

>>19975356
I really dont believe you're white, what ethnicity are you? It's beyond laughable to suggest if she puts the shopping cart back then she has to beat you to "vent'

>>19975366
Obviously I was being sarcastic, you seething retard.

I honestly don't get how even you on the other side of this discussion can't see where I'm coming from. You don't know anyone who is an asshole who starts fights with everyone but tries to claim moral superiority by making a huge deal out of issues of 'decorum'?

>>19975379
Yeah I do but the shopping cart thing is not like that unless the person thinks they're being watched and is going to somehow be stigmatized for it. Littering is similar in most cases

I dont care whatsoever if you litter by the way. What I'm autistic about is people lying, and you are lying about morality

>>19975393
In what sense could I possibly be lying? I opened myself up for endless abuse for taking a disagreeable position on this, just because it was sincere.

>>19975401
About the obvious correlation between different types of altruistic behavior, even seemingly meaningless ones

>>19973608
>liberals literally care about rocks (aka the non-sentient environment) more than they care about you

Holy shit, "tree-hugger" isn't just an expression. How are libs not extinct yet? Are you telling me this is a viable survival strategy? Or are they leeching off the conservative half of the population like some kind of benign parasite?

>>19975413
I never tried to deny that. But it's a pretty flimsy correlation with a lot of complicating factors, and more importantly it is just a correlation. If you browbeat someone into putting back the cart, that's all you get. You don't change their internal ideas about altruism.

The problem is you're presenting this model that only works on NPCs (who just follow their natural instincts ad infinitum) on everyone. My natural inclination as a kid listening to his mommy was to be a nerd about this stuff but I have a 145 IQ and thus have the ability to reassess my 'default' approaches to things and develop a new view that goes beyond one-dimensional angles, which I have done throughout my adult life. I think I've made the fact that I have a complex reasoning for this pretty clear in all of these threads too, it's not just "hurr durr I hate garbage cans". The fact that I face all this seething, one-dimensional resistance that doesn't even acknowledge the point just reflects on people like you.

>>19975446
>if you browbeat someone
Already addressed, we are talking about voluntary acts

You have not made anything clear at all. You have no argument whatsoever to support your position that littering is somehow moral. All you have is "it doesnt matter that much, other things matter more", which is true and irrelevant. It is a symbol.

>>19975420
They also care more about shopping carts, apparently.

i subvocalize everything i read, even when i read your shitposts

>>19975474
>yeah in a writer. Well spoken word actually. In fact I'm part of a collaborative project, many people perform my works. Yeah. Yeah you should come over

>>19975453
Do you realize how many potential "symbols" are out there? Have you stopped to consider that some of them would actually matter at least a little bit?

You could have made the litmus test the "let another car into the lane when there is no reason not to" test, people actually die due to a lack of this. Apart from the fact that most of you guys don't drive, the reason you didn't pick this is it actually requires keeping a level head in a situation where insecure faggots let their egos blow up, and it involves some actual sacrifice. Driving is a classic example of somewhere where 'heckin good citizens' become selfish or even psychotic, at great cost to society.

You're ignoring this and hundreds of other possible issues for the reason which is core to my point: we have limited energy for these things. People absolutely should prioritize more important issues and only worry about less important ones when they become important situationally, rather than sitting around seething.

>>19974448
>>19975420
So liberals use their cold reptilian logic to push technology forward, meanwhile conservatives exist to remind them that we're human

>>19975511
The car example is also a good one, though it has different dynamics. What point do you think you're making

>>19975524
People have extremely finite energy for making moral and emotional decisions, and even less practical energy to carry them out. There is quite a lot of scholarly evidence for this, it's fundamental to most intelligent critiques of our current society. If you teach people to waste their energy on stupid shit that doesn't even get results, they are empty when it comes time for more serious issues (plus now they've pissed off a bunch of potential allies).

This is not just a set of instructions for thinking people, it is also a description of normal people. Good hearted NPCs remain on autopilot about petty squabbles and save their empathy for relationship issues where it matters.

>>19975607
Ethical behaviors still correlate with each other regardless of people having finite moral energy, and nobody is ever going to do some terrible thing because their ethical energy was somehow depleted by returning a shopping cart

>>19971259
>>studies shown leftists are more likepy to exhibit dark triad
>>studies show women find leftists less attractive
this is contradictory

>>19971044
The problem with the npc meme is that you can't tell what someone else's consciousness is like, only your own. Self reporting only goes so far. For example, someone might actually have an "inner monologue" but think of it in another way which would cause them to report wrongly that they do not. For example, does an inner monologue have what your voice sounds like to you or what it sounds like recorded? Where is the voice coming from? I do have an inner monologue with definite answers to those questions, but your answers may be different than mine for something we both call an "inner monologue" and it might be that yours doesn't fit my definition. Inner monologue is a more clear cut example of how to communicate this though, but the trouble comes in with stuff like visualization and imagination

>>19975615
I was never saying "don't put the shopping cart back", I am saying "don't make any kind of a big deal over it". People rightfully handle that issue on automatic pilot, it doesn't really involve energy at all.

For a while I was pissed at the shopping cart meme so I was trying to not put it back as a sort of protest, until I realized I was going against my automatic instinct and wasting my energy by *not* doing it. Now I put it back most of the time but if I don't feel like it and there is a reasonable means to not put it back (the lot isn't packed, there is another unofficial stack of carts next to my car, etc.) I don't.

>>19975639
This, the way it's presented makes a lot of people think it is literally a narrator in your head (think The Stanley Parable), which is fucking ridiculous so they say no.

>>19975630
you already said this and it was thoroughly adressed

>>19975272
If nobody put the shopping cart back, there would be no need for a shopping cart attendant and people would be laid off. So in theory you could be saving someone's livelihood by leaving the shopping cart out

>If nobody put the shopping cart back, there would be no need for a shopping cart attendant and people would be laid off. So in theory you could be saving someone's livelihood by leaving the shopping cart out

>>19975693
This, also most shopping cart attendants seem to like looking for stray carts. I worked in a grocery store for like 5 minutes and it was the only enjoyable part of an otherwise miserable job.

The corrals are unneeded for the logistical operation of the business. They just came into existence a few decades ago to make customers feel like there is an 'order' to things. It's a growing social phenomenon that people can't be told "just leave it alone, it'll be taken care of" and chill out, so we give them the opportunity to do something useless to feel like they're part of the process. I'd have to do some research to find good examples on this but the classic one is "push to cross the street" buttons that don't actually do anything, they just make the pushers feel less anxious about the automatic process of the crosswalk lights changing.

>>19975700
To date I have not seen a single person attempt to contest this

>>19975700
>>19975724
the simple answer is that nowadays it’s never the sole job of someone to put away carts. Often the job falls on an “associate” (pleb) who if he isn’t putting away cart is stocking shelves or sweeping the floor. So nobody is losing their jobs if everyone puts away their carts, since management while just find some other busy work for people to do

>>19975693
The job would become extinct just like several other jobs in the past due to automation. The person responsible for taking care of carts would find another job with a similar salary (it probably isn't much anyway).
Here's a list of jobs which might not exist in 8 years:
https://www.careeraddict.com/disappearing-jobs

I wonder how these cashiers and dispatchers will survive. They certainly can't do any other job.

>>19975754
That only makes sense if you think they have a fixed number of employees that never changes based on the work load. Yes, if they weren't putting away shopping carts they'd have to do something else (really not a meaningful argument for putting your own cart back, by the way). No, that doesn't mean the management would never remove jobs. What they want is to get 100% of the work done with all employees working 100% of the time. If they can now get that done with 9 employees rather than 10, they'll get rid of the 10th.

>>19975762
>The person responsible for taking care of carts would find another job with a similar salary
This is the retarded part of an otherwise reasonable statement. The market has absolutely no obligation to make new jobs when it gets rid of old ones. It sometimes happens that way by coincidence but it is not hard coded in the system and we constantly face job shortages.

That's why you see so much discussion of basic income, it is known that a situation where human workers are not worth it at all anymore is possible and it may well be on its way.

>>19975806
>That's why you see so much discussion of basic income

I see moreso the discussion of UBI due to people not wanting to work, not necessarily due to being displaced by the system.

I would never, ever, EVER trust such a thing like UBI with the US govt. It could perhaps work in smaller countries with smaller homogeneous populations, but I could never see such an inept and inefficient organization like the US govt. handling such a thing.

>>19971044
https://hiltondesignblog.wordpress.com/2015/11/05/introduction-to-semiotics/
Constructionism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructionism_(learning_theory)
created a generation of retards

>>19971044
and here's another pic

>>19975799
nothing you said is wrong, but where we seem to disagree on is exactly how important putting away carts is to the business. I don’t believe people will lose their jobs because from my experience putting away the carts is a low priority task compared to any work that can be done inside the store. I used to work for a home improvement big-box store and bringing in the carts was done once, at the end of the day, by all employees after closing time. It was just a small part of everyone’s task list like sweeping up debris or tidying up shelves. The seasons changing had a bigger affect on the number of employees than anything else

>>19971059
>>19971098
I subvocalize everything, including math and logic. Placing the abstract concepts into a physical space improves my accuracy. Writing on paper is best, speaking out loud is second best, subvocalizing is third best. Many times I even visually imagine what writing out math on paper would look like if I don't have the time to write it out; like I will literally do pic related in my head in a visual space.

t. was two years accelerated in math as a kid doing exactly this so you don't get to tell me I'm shit at math and logic.

>>19971234
Yeah, but I'm sure they play a mean pinball

>>19971351
Yes, that's how I ended up conservative

>>19975860
If you dont do
(70 + 40) + (3 + 8)
You are ngmi

>>19971645
>>19971665
the meme didn't originate to "be a direct criticism of mindless groupthink."

it originated from a study about people with inner monologues. What happened after that was a very fast merging of this with the long-standing meme regarding "sheeple." That just got replaced by "NPCs" because it was at the forefront of the memetic lexicon.

>>19975874
Now that you mention it this is how I most often breakdown math in my head if I'm doing it quickly. But I will often visualize parenthesis too like I would on paper, like I visualize 10 (7 +4) by literally imaging 10*7 + 10*4 = 70 + 40 = 7 + 4 with a zero at the end = 110.

>>19975875
The first use of NPC was to mean literally like in a video game, non sentient robots just following programming(ie state propaganda). Its a very old meme

>>19975889
Jesus Christ obviously the first use of it was in reference to actual video game non-player characters. But the NPC wojack was created, and the meme spread like wildfire, on /pol/ after that article came out regarding like 50% of people not having inner monologues or the ability to create an image in their head at all.

it was literally this thread
https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/184701729/

>>19975859
However you cut it, you aren't doing the workers any favors by putting the carts back

>>19975888
For me it's not strictly visual, but I would place 10*7 "to the left" so to speak. Like in my mind I say ok put that one "over there", which feels like it is to the left, then I look at 10*4 and then I go back and look at the first one and add them together.

The fact that this thread gave me the concept of subvocalization reminded me to stop doing it, I'm reading faster now.

>>19975901
Calling people NPCs for being conformist is older than 2018

>>19975910
yeah that's exactly right. The numbers have a directional awareness to eachother in their roman numerical format in my head, but I'm not constrained by or to that "space" so I can add and remove anything there that I want or focus on one part and bring in the rest into any place I need.

Unironically like this

>>19975924
but it wasn't a widespread meme until then. It hadn't spread like a meme does until September 2018. It's a documented fact. The Know Your meme page acknowledges the groupthink references prior to it but it didn't become a "meme" until 2018.

So no, calling people NPCs in reference to their inner monologue, or using the NPC wojack to reference anybody susceptible to groupthink, was not a thing until September 2018. Objective fact. Fuck off with any autistic nitpicking. Some people were curious about why the inner monologue and group-think applications of the meme were linked and I explained it, objectively and with documented proof. Fuck off retard.

>>19975941
Stop crying, it was used before then
>know your meme
Lmao

>>19975904
I wasn’t that anon and I don’t believe in his statement, even though I put away my cart every time. I put away the cart because I want to, simple as. I’m probably autistic because I get a small amount of joy in putting something in its “proper” place, which for a shopping cart is in the corral. I don’t really care if the employees appreciate it or not, because again I’m not doing it for them I’m doing it for me.

>>19975945
On /lit/ we used to call them p-zombies

>>19975945
>it was used before then
but it wasn't a meme before then. Fact. Stop being a fucking retard.

Not everything that exists is a meme. I could start calling you a fart-sniffing retard and that wouldn't be a "meme" unless using that insult, in this kind of scenario, was specifically trending in the public sphere of the internet and image macros, pepes, and wojacks were created in reference to it. Some anon could find this in the archives and say
>people have been using the insult "fart-sniffing retard since at least 2022" but if it didn't catch on until another event or post went viral in 2024 then it wouldn't be a meme until then. The origin of the meme would not be me calling you a fart-sniffing retard on February 23rd 2022. Did you understand that you fart-sniffing retard?

>>19975966
Anon your interests in farts isn't going to change the facts here

>>19975974
Small group of people use insult for years

One major event spurns it to the forefront of memes used wildly on the internet, spawning the most iconic image of the meme and a specific use of the insult in a new context

the second one is the beginning of the meme. That is the fact. You calling someone an NPC in 2011 is not the beginning of the meme. It is an important distinction.

>>19971044
People think monologue means monomania. They can't relate to the idea of someone having habituated verbal cognitive processes. Thinking for these people is something they actually have to muster.

>>19975991
>habituated verbal cognitive processes
best way to describe it I have ever seen
>Thinking for these people is something they actually have to muster
yes that's why they're NPCs lol

>>19975953
I appreciate the confession, it supports what I was saying that cart corrals were invented almost solely for that reason

>>19971044
>have inner monologue
>have inner ear and can imagine whatever sound in my head
>have very limited inner sight and can't actually "see" anything in my head beyond a vague memory-like false image
it's over for me /lit/bros

>>19975667
that wasn't me

>>19972805
>>19972733
anon...

>>19976088
If I understand you correctly (and with these discussions, that is the million dollar question), you're fine. You're not supposed to be able to actually see a movie projected over reality (that would just be schizophrenia), inner sight is sort of in a different dimension.

I'm still not convinced this isn't a huge troll campaign to gaslight people into thinking that it's possible to hear words in your head and that it's normal normal. I mean wtf. Sure maybe some genius like von Neumann or Einstein but the vast majority of people should not be able to do this. And the fact that I'm able to type coherently despite not being able to hear words in my head makes me think this is all just a big prank.

>>19976238
I'm inclined to think it's a prank that people *don't*.

You really can't sort of 'hold a conversation with yourself' as you map out logical concepts? You don't even get song lyrics stuck in your head?

>>19975286
he's baiting you. Pro-littering is a meme

>>19976450
The fact that it's a meme doesn't mean we're secretly shrill faggots who lose our shit over the idea of a wrapper being on the ground and never break any rules.

>>19976238
>makes me think this is all just a big prank
How exactly do you "think" this? It's a bit too abstract of an idea to fall under the "uhgh uhgh, me want banana" category.

>>19976238
You can't practice a speech in your head? If you wanted to memorize a few lines of Shakespeare, how would you do it?

>>19976494
Not him but that I could understand. The few things I have memorized have to sort of 'come out of me', almost a stream of consciousness. I don't 'possess' them like I do facts or concepts I have made sense of.

>>19975724
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

>>19976563
Everyone has heard of that, I went to college. It has no relevance to the question of if shopping carts actually help grocery store employees.

>>19976578
It's the exact same principle and has all the relevance.

>>19976616
The application of it to the situation would be "if you don't put your shopping cart back, others will see yours sitting there and not put theirs back" (you're welcome for doing the thinking for you, NPC). It has zero relevance to the question, it is just a higher quantity of the same thing and we have established pretty solid reasons that the thing itself does not harm them, and might even help them.

>>19975420
>>19975519
How tf is caring about things unlike you "cold" or "reptilian"? They just have silenced more of their ego and therefor value others as much as they do themselves.

>>19976820
You're missing the point. These aren't egalitarians who are 'at one with the universe', they value people and entities MORE than they value similar to themselves. Not just more than themselves, more than the many people who are superficially similar to them. They actually have a negative reaction to their in-group.

It is literally just prejudice inversed.

>>19976885
*they value OTHER people and entities more