/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14696140]

Books to describe this phenomenon?

[Anonymous No.14696143]

>>14696140
Are those people being ironic? I see something in between 1 and 2.

[Anonymous No.14696151]

>>14696143
Lacking inner monologue can cause you to get 5. But this is twitter fags we're talking about

[cunt No.14696159]

>>14696140
We literally had a thread on this the other day
sage

[Anonymous No.14696160]

>>14696140
So, can't they like, remember the last time they held an apple?
How does memory work for these people?

[Anonymous No.14696179]

>Number 1
>Working on incorporating other senses for maximum escapism at any time.
Feels good man.

[Anonymous No.14696181]

I'm not sure... I kinda narrate a description, and that gives me an "idea of an apple", but I'm not sure if i'm actually visualizing or just assumed that was what people meant.

[Anonymous No.14696183]

The only one I can think of close to that is Berkeley’s “A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge.”
I can’t do it unless I imagine a scene, like a lady in an orchard picking one and handing it to me, or pulling one out of a box and feeling its weight and texture. There has to be motion or some sense in addition to the image.

[Anonymous No.14696185]

>>14696143
>>14696151
>>14696160
they are attempting to literally see an apple in the backs of their eyelids as opposed to imagining one inside their head. it's dog easy to see anything in your head but if you are able to see it as a point in the back of your eyelids you might have psychosis

[Anonymous No.14696186]

>>14696143
The whole apple for me is less clear than 5 but I can see a little patch of apple, like I can see a flash of green melding into red with those tiny white/beige specks, the subtle undulations that make pseudo-shadows and lips of reflecting light, and a bit of water droplets, that is much clearer than 5. I just can't see the whole apple that well at once, I have to move from part to part.

[Anonymous No.14696189]

>>14696179
I can also incorporate other senses but it takes extra focus and energy.

[Anonymous No.14696193]

>>14696140
>close my eyes
>all i can see is anime tiddies

[Anonymous No.14696197]

>>14696140
i see an image but everytime i try to move my position or view in said image, the image changes entirely and it kind of creates an effect of perpetual dispalcement

[Anonymous No.14696201]

how is 5 not the case for everyone? dont you just remember an image that youve seen before?

[Anonymous No.14696209]

>>14696201
wait i meant 1

[Anonymous No.14696211]

>>14696181
>>14696186
So when you guys read fiction, you don't try to construct an image and a space inside your with all the details that the author gives you? How do you guys read fiction then?

[Anonymous No.14696216]

Our parents always told us that TV and computer games would kill our imagination, and it looks like they were right. There is a new generation of people externally overstimulated from such an early age that they are unable to come up with internal stimulae.

[Anonymous No.14696217]

>>14696140

I see 1 pretty clearly
The deep vibrant red and the texture it's all there
How can people struggle to imagine something as simple as an apple I don't understand?

[cunt No.14696218]

>>14696189
that's actually a symptom of schizotypal personality disorder

[Anonymous No.14696219]

>>14696211
they're either women or leftists

[Anonymous No.14696225]

>>14696140
i feel like that image is kind of leading the witness. imagine I had a chart of five lions, didn't show you one, asked you to visualize a lion. then only after you described what you visualized would I show you the chart of 5 I already had. think it would fit one of them?

[Anonymous No.14696228]

>>14696211
Pretty much how I just described looking at the apple. It's like im looking in on a given view, which is a bit less clear than reality, but I get more focused flashes that are vivid.

[Anonymous No.14696231]

>>14696218
Is this really true? Not to be a bugman, but can you give me a link?

[Anonymous No.14696232]

>>14696216
i have played tons of games since i was 5, and i only get 1. and im undersocialized, so i attribute it to oversocialization and an overactive monologue.

[Anonymous No.14696240]

This generation's "Dude, what if we all see colors differently and your red is different from my red...whoa"

[Anonymous No.14696250]

>>14696140
I'm pretty sure that the reason they aren't seeing color is because they have nothing else imagined in that scene to contrast the red i.e. a black or white background, it's just a given that the apple is red and that's all that is going on in the scene so you can't really see it as a result

[Anonymous No.14696254]

>>14696211
>>14696186
nevermind im a retard and meant to say 1

[Anonymous No.14696263]

>>14696185
Mine blone. Wtf I literally never knew I had two sources of image processing

[Anonymous No.14696286]

>>14696140
I can't do it on purpose.

[Anonymous No.14696299]

>>14696231
lol if asking for evidence paints you as a bugman I'm all in, neet feels are a pretty shit foundation for opinion.

[Anonymous No.14696311]

>>14696211
>all the details that the author gives you
Of course. I add details on top of that, too. Sometimes I get autistically disturbed when the writer says something later that doesn't conform to my additions. Dialogues are like a play in my head that takes place in real time (if there's a meaningful pause, I do one too). It's probably why I read so slowly. Call me dumb, but I wouldn't want it any other way.

[Anonymous No.14696324]

>>14696225
Exactly. Some people apparently still get less then a 5 even when presented with the bloody 5 right in front of them!

[Anonymous No.14696325]

Itt people pretending they see things in their head

[Anonymous No.14696334]

>>14696311
absolutely based

[Anonymous No.14696338]

>>14696140
I see nothing but have non stop inner monologue.

[Anonymous No.14696345]

>>14696325
>he can't roll his eyeballs backwards 180 degrees

[Anonymous No.14696346]

>>14696311
>Sometimes I get autistically disturbed when the writer says something later that doesn't conform to my additions.
I'm like this too. Sometimes the author doesn't specify something at first, so I have to make it myself. But then specifies it in a way that contradicts my own version, so I have to alter it again and I really dislike it.

[Anonymous No.14696351]

>>14696325
have you ever done sculpture? after spending a few years doing construction, digital sculpture, and clay sculpture, I'm a fairly visual thinker. I often gesture and use my hands while speaking to convey some of the spacial imagery I associate with what I'm saying. I don't see things so literally when reading, but definitely when just thinking.

[Anonymous No.14696352]

>>14696211
5 here. I construct an “image” but It’s a conceptual form lacking color. I can imagine every aspect of the form, I can ascribe it color as some unseen metadata, and whatever else I want, but it still doesn’t look like anything

[Anonymous No.14696357]

>>14696140
A quick thought experiment for anyone below 1. Look at the image. Without closing your eyes, imagine the apple is blue. Now close your eyes and repeat the same process. Do you now clearly see a blue apple in your minds eye?

Something is severely wrong with you if you can't do this. ALL people daydream, studies show that on average they spend nearly half the day doing it. This must be one of those "you are now aware of your own breathing" things.

[Anonymous No.14696366]

>>14696357
I daydream about 95% of every day, I am always lost in my own head. I cannot see color in my thoughts however

[Anonymous No.14696375]

>>14696346
>>14696311
I unironically just keep the earlier version when that happens, fuck the author

[Anonymous No.14696388]

I think this whole mind thing can be explained. I'm going to grossly oversimplify, but lets say developing consciousness was beneficial at some point, just like eyes from an evolutionary perspective. If you look at nature you see thousands of different stratagems with the same goal, detect and interpret changes in light. My argument is that consciousness might also be similarly developed, with different approaches to the same goal. If you wish to write a function with a certain output there are literally infinitely many ways to do so.

[Anonymous No.14696393]

>>14696366
Read less manga. People who grew up with black and white television are more likely to dream in greyscale.

[Anonymous No.14696399]

What the fuck is the difference between seeing things and imagining things? Doesn't imagination involve, you know, images?

[Anonymous No.14696407]

>>14696399
If you imagine visually there shouldn't be any difference. The same thing is meant.

[Anonymous No.14696412]

>>14696388
Even if that's the case, literature is thousand times less enjoyable if you can't imagine everything in your head.

[Anonymous No.14696414]

>>14696393
I’ve never read manga and I grew up with color television. When I’m reading I imagine form, layout, structure, no color. I wouldn’t even call it greyscale.

[Anonymous No.14696417]

is it weird that I imagine someone reaching for the apple grabbing the apple and holding it and then I realize that person is me?

[Anonymous No.14696420]

>>14696399
Lets say you're blind from birth. You can still imagine, but not visually.

Perhaps we could try this thought experiment with another sense:

Close your eyes and imagine someone is gently caressing you hair. How much do you "feel" it and compare it to how clearly you can visualize things.

[Anonymous No.14696426]

>>14696412
Perhaps that is why there are people who can't stand reading

[Anonymous No.14696435]

>>14696417
Next time you try to imagine it I will steal your apple and laugh at you in your mind

[Anonymous No.14696437]

lol no one has mentioned it yet?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphantasia

[Anonymous No.14696441]

>>14696435
dang anon you look pretty cute

[Anonymous No.14696451]

>>14696437
Because its fake and can easily be proven fake by pushing one of these retards into a MRI.

[Anonymous No.14696457]

>>14696366
>I cannot see color in my thoughts however
So even with your eyes open, you can't look at the red apple and imagine it as a blue apple?

[Anonymous No.14696459]

>>14696451
I mean it says there that they reportedly don’t have aphantasia in their dreams, and I’m not sure how an mri can judge qualia

[Anonymous No.14696461]

i don't understand how someone can see nothing with their minds eye. how is that even possible? how do you get a 5 from that image without seeing the metrics and thinking that you'll get a 5 first?

[Anonymous No.14696462]

>>14696140
I can see a 3D object but I can't focus on it's details unless I imagine it moving.

[Anonymous No.14696464]

This question is asked too vaguely. I normally don't picture things vividly but if I really focus, I can (I think) see them more vividly. For example I never picture color unless I really focus and try, and then it's still almost slipping away.

The real question is whether what I'm seeing when I see a colored apple is the same as what a normal visualizer sees when they see a colored apple. When I struggle to "kinda" see color, I report it as "I am seeing color." But maybe when they see the color, they are really seeing something much, much more vivid. That's what interests me.

[Anonymous No.14696469]

>>14696181
*npc alert*

[Anonymous No.14696472]

>>14696143
I see something betwee! 1 and 2 as well. I was going to just go with 1 but more accurately I see this.

[Anonymous No.14696473]

>>14696459
>I mean it says there that they reportedly don’t have aphantasia in their dreams
Then it is entirely psychological. The cure, as with all mental illnesses, is severe beatings.

[Anonymous No.14696476]

>>14696441
nice try but im not giving the apple back

[Anonymous No.14696479]

I think a big portion is confused and thinks it to mean you can actually control your visual input at will.

[Anonymous No.14696486]

I can flash a full color image but it's happening outside of my visual field, there's nothing imagistic about it, it doesn't stay, I cannot observe it.

[Anonymous No.14696488]

>>14696476
give me your boipucci instead

[Anonymous No.14696489]

>>14696457
No I just “know” it’s blue, same with red, like it’s “metadata” separately attached to the colorless form. Texture even, but I genuinely don’t see color of any kind.

[Anonymous No.14696490]

>>14696211
>How do you guys read fiction then?

I see flashes of the bare-bones "internal logic" of the described scene. If the author says that the well-dressed guy with the pointy nose and wild hair goes to the big wooden door and turns the brass knob, I mostly just see "shadowy figure standing on something like a doorstep ... shadowy hand against also shadowy backdrop turning knob."

If an author goes about describing a room, I basically just skim it. I still read it, but I can't make the picture "stick." I can only picture what's being described as an action, actively. If the author says "he walked to the mantle and placed the picture on it," again I can picture the logic of that, I can see a figure approaching a mantle, but it's not like a play.

If I focus harder than usual, I can sort of force myself to see more. But faces for example are very hard for me, I can't imagine how anyone makes a face "stick" in their mind. As each feature of the faces gets described, I lose sight of the last one that was described, similar to a room or a wilderness scene.

Sometimes I'll try to appropriate memories I have of places I've been for real, but this often isn't useful.

Mostly I just try to get by with a bare minimum. If I'm reading about a guy in a room being visited by a ghost, I just do my best to picture the room. If the author says shit that contradicts my vague logic-image of the room, I ignore it unless it's absolutely vital.

[Anonymous No.14696491]

>>14696140
Do any of these people dream? Or even remember what they dream the night before. How can something so simple be hard to these faggots

[Anonymous No.14696492]

>>14696250
Oh shit you're right. When I imagine the apple against white backdrop it becomes crystal clear. I see 1.

[Anonymous No.14696494]

>>14696479
>you can actually control your visual input at will.
You can't imagine yourself cutting up the apple or biting into it, or placing it on the desk?

[Anonymous No.14696501]

>>14696488
i just threw the apple at your dick and ran away into the trees tbqh

[Anonymous No.14696504]

>>14696490
you just described my experience very closely >>14696489

[Anonymous No.14696507]

>>14696501
thow more apples at my dick pls

[Anonymous No.14696516]

There is a pretty easy way to test this actually. Give someone a short story, where a character is pretty well described. Then show them a drawing of said character where it fullfills the descriptions, but has a couple of extras that were never mentioned in the story. Ask people how they feel about the drawing and how it matches up to whatever they visualized (or not).

[Anonymous No.14696526]

>>14696140
>imagine apple
>image extends and sprawls to a tree and climbs upward past a gathering squirrel to chirping birds beyond the clouds clipping past clouds and planes going past the sky extending further from the sun a picture broadening with more and more planets growing fainter and more numerous receding from a glittering cosmos all the way to the benevolent gaze of the heavenly father

[Anonymous No.14696531]

>>14696504
>>14696489
Can you see colour if you focus more? I can hold onto it very briefly.

Also, do you find that your flashes of "what's happening in this scene/moment" draw upon real experiences/memories rather than being abstract? For example if I imagine slicing an apple, like someone just mentioned, I imagine myself at my kitchen counter, where I just was an hour ago cutting some bread. It's close enough that it's like it gets "called up" as a convenient basis for the apple-cutting visual.

But it's still not fully visual, it's not like a video recording of me at the counter, it's more like the-logic-and-feeling-of-being-at-the-counter-looking-down-at-my-arms-and-the-counter-slicing-something. And this isn't really retained either, it's only used as long as it's needed, as long as I'm actively thinking about "imagine slicing an apple."

[Anonymous No.14696537]

>>14696140
The problem here is that zoomers have never seen a fruit in real life.

[Anonymous No.14696540]

>>14696494
I can, what I mean is that things I imagine and things I see feel very different. I can't override what I actually see. Its kinda layered over it in a more "transparent" form. What I think people wrongly attribute it to be is the ability to vividly halucinate, even with your eyes open.

[Anonymous No.14696548]

>>14696540
>the ability to vividly halucinate, even with your eyes open.
I can vividly imagine manipulating the objects directly in front of me without actually touching them or closing my eyes.

[Anonymous No.14696550]

Qualia strikes again

[Anonymous No.14696553]

>>14696140
I can only think of realistic imagery in my head when I'm in my bed listening to music. I put on a psychedelic rock playlist and I just usually try to focus on every instrument playing. One time I was picturing a concert in my head, the details and everything. I did this for 30 minutes not moving a muscle and it literally felt like I astral projected into a concert in my whole head. I was so numb in every part of my body it felt like my whole reality was just in my concert. It a was a pretty cool moment

[Anonymous No.14696559]

>>14696548
To the point it is indistinguishable from what is real?

[Anonymous No.14696568]

>>14696550
Pretty sure Wittgenstein proved qualia is retarded.

[Anonymous No.14696575]

>>14696568
How so?

[Anonymous No.14696580]

>>14696559
Visually yes. I cannot reproduce other forms of sensory perception as vividly.

[Anonymous No.14696583]

>>14696357
I imagined the girl taking on a blue color palette as well
what does this mean?
at first I was retarded and just imagined a normal blue apple.

[Anonymous No.14696587]

>>14696575
private language argument

[Anonymous No.14696594]

>>14696531
>can hold on to color briefly
I’m really not sure, I hesitate to call anything I’m thinking “color” but,
>draw upon real experience
Yes, in fact the first time I imagined the apple I was also vaguely imagining myself when I was 16 since I used to eat everything even the stem. That didn’t really modulate the image at all or add anything but I still imagined it for some reason

>the-logic-and-feeling
>not retained
Yes almost exactly. I would say “form” for myself but feeling is right to me. I’ll generally imagine brief still “images” of a scene which aren’t retained and are basically just form and anything difficult to imagine is just *logic* that’s avoided altogether but still kind of there as metadata

[Anonymous No.14696595]

Is it still surprising to anyone that most humans are glorified animals?

[Anonymous No.14696601]

>>14696580
I can't do that. Mine is like a ghosty afterimage superimposed over what I actually see.

[Anonymous No.14696602]

>>14696240
I've heard that seeing colours thing a million times, this is the first time I've ever heard this apple thing.

[Anonymous No.14696607]

It's a 1 for me. I can conjure tastes, smell, feel, realistic moving images, etc. as well. My imagination is strong enough I can ejaculate by thinking about sex. Might be related to my autism.

[Anonymous No.14696613]

>>14696595
Animals can definitely imagine things. Cats play stalk all the time.

[Anonymous No.14696620]

>>14696607
how can you imagine sex if you've never touched a woman

[Anonymous No.14696623]

>>14696620
Same way I can imagine dragons flying. It's kinda the selling point of this whole "imagination" thing. Now i'm doin your mom and she is nasty.

[Anonymous No.14696626]

>>14696620
Not him but I've never had sex but I can imagine it very clearly.

[Anonymous No.14696627]

>>14696623
Not me, but that's basically what I was going to say anyway.

[Anonymous No.14696643]

>>14696626
>but I can imagine it very clearly.
Can you, though? Can you really reproduce the sensation of cumming inside a woman?

[Anonymous No.14696654]

>>14696643
Course i can. No idea how accurate it actually might be but most fantasies aren't meant to be realistic either.

[Anonymous No.14696659]

>>14696601
On some level I am still visually aware of my surroundings, but not in any meaningful way. It's like zoning out when driving on an empty highway at night and not coming to your senses until you've arrived at your destination, with no recollection of how you've gotten there. Direct visual input is not given priority.

[Anonymous No.14696662]

>>14696643
Yeah I can. Though the cumming part isn't the part I most like to imagine, it's the touching of the two bodies that feels nice to imagine. When I don't fap for a few days, my mind automatically runs entire sex sessions whenever it's idle, which makes abstinence much harder.

[Anonymous No.14696672]

>>14696594
Yeah that's eerily similar, godspeed fellow impoverished visualizer.

What I'm really curious about is whether this is all malleable, like maybe we have certain innate tendencies, but we can fall into these for various reasons and let other potential faculties atrophy. For example I am much more into philosophy than literature, and not very artistically inclined, so maybe I just never cultivated my visualizing. Year after year I'd get a little better at analytic/"form"-thinking, like you said, more and more used to it, so that every year it got a little less likely that I would suddenly begin cultivating a vivid mind's eye. Any situation I got into, it was always more convenient/rewarding to rely on what I already did well (think in logic/form-images), so no reason to change. And of course now I'm at the point that it's exhausting and discouraging to try to visualize like an artist, so I'll simply assume I'm innately bad at it.

But what if it could be cultivated? What if our mind's eye is actually split up into different layers and levels, different kinds of visualizing, like pictureless logic-thinking, "structural" thinking, and THEN colorful visualizing on top of that?

Sometimes while I'm lying in bed I'll try visualizing things differently, like putting stress on my normal tendencies. For example if I picture an object, I often can't rotate it much, because my mind's eye doesn't have a feeling for what certain sides of it would look like. But I force myself to do it anyway, force my mind to figure it out. Not sure if it works.

Another example, a bit weirder, is that I'll try to bring objects "closer" to my mind's eye. I've noticed that this is actually jarring, it stands out as very obviously "something I never do," it feels new. If you've ever seen a movie with the 3D gimmick effect where they put objects right up to the screen, that's similar. I often try to picture a wagon wheel, and then let it roll "towards" me, right into my "face" in my mind's eye (if that makes sense). It's genuinely surprising when I do it, too close for comfort even. Which is weird, because how can my own mind surprise me? By doing this, am I cultivating some potential that is only latent?

Sorry for wall of text, just fascinated by this topic.

[Anonymous No.14696681]

>>14696643
Not him but it's not the same feeling as when you physically rub your dick against something. I only ejaculated twice doing this, back when I didn't have access to porn, but from what I remember it was more like a physical pleasure in a vivid dream that you can recall when you wake up, or a weak physical feeling, sort of physical feeling in the dick at the same time as an intense emotional feeling from the imagined sex.

[Anonymous No.14696687]

>>14696594
>>14696672
My experience is that when I'm reading a descriptive text, I can imagine the thing described very vividly when my direct attention is on the text not the image, but when I shift the focus to the images, then they suddenly fall apart.

[Anonymous No.14696689]

>>14696140
I am a legit one, senpai. Can't believe what mongrels most humans are. A cull is long-overdue.

[Anonymous No.14696694]

>>14696587
>Lets assume there is a language only the subject can understand.

>Except they actually can't understand it (because reasons), therefore proof by contradiction.

>Q.E.D.

Extremely weak.

[Anonymous No.14696701]

There's also the possibility that people see the same thing but that they dont remember/describe it the same way, much like a dream is difficult to remember because it never actually happened

[Anonymous No.14696712]

>>14696701
what are you talking about, dreams are just things happening very far away

[Anonymous No.14696714]

>>14696568
>>14696587
Wittgenstein doesn't discount the existence of qualia or of mental essences or anything like that, he simply says they are (effectively) irrelevant when talking about the workings of language.

The private language argument is an argument about LANGUAGE, not about consciousness. He's not making some kind of weird metaphysical Hegelian statement about how consciousness "takes (at least) two to tango," he's just saying that whatever the solitary man on the island is doing when he thinks about the coconuts, it's not language properly speaking. Language proper is the intersubjective mediation of meaning-intentions, as mediated by pragmatic outcomes (what James calls a meaning-intention "re-entering the stream" or "cashing out"). Language is a general description of communication, not the metaphysical wetware of consciousness.

[Anonymous No.14696742]

>>14696672
>fall into these tendencies for various reasons
>not very artistically inclined, analytic
What I've been curious about is people who are humanities-minded crossing over to STEM or vice versa, and I guess if their thinking-style has any impact on this. When I read scifi or something (written by obviously humanities-minded people) it's often something like cringy to me when they try to cross over into science, opting for "woah, like, conscioussness collapses the wavefunction bro". The writers I think do scifi the best are those ostensibly STEM-minded folk that crossed over like Michael Crichton and Gene Wolfe. Norbert Wiener in some regards.

>different kinds of visualizing, like pictureless logic-thinking, "structural" thinking, and THEN colorful visualizing
That's plausible even though I still have trouble believing that other people actually visualize color and don't just have a lower threshold for the things they're describing. Like someone that says "yeah i understand this concept" and then you ask them a question about it and it's clear they just have a lower threshold before they classify something as "knowledge", and you both know the same thing.

>It's genuinely surprising when I do it, too close for comfort even. Which is weird, because how can my own mind surprise me?
I don't know you're alone on that one but you may be right. I'd classify this as a form of meditation and I was thinking that perhaps something like that would recalibrate and build control over my mind and strengthen the parts you described that atrophied. After all, people who meditate for a long time describe epiphanies and such, maybe they're accessing this atrophied layer of mind or some shit

[Anonymous No.14696753]

>>14696140
>tfw my apple is green

[Anonymous No.14696758]

>>14696193
Based

[Anonymous No.14696760]

>>14696140
MRI scans have proved everyone is a 5. People here talking about 1 and 2 are just larping.

[Anonymous No.14696776]

>>14696760
>mri scans have proven

[Anonymous No.14696800]

>>14696516
I have no trouble visualizing, but I might fail this test. I don't give a shit about appearance description for characters short of defining qualities. Like fat, maybe hair color, etc. Clothing descriptions I don't bother to store in my memory. I keep the essence of what makes the character not something that could change from scene to scene. You'd get a general description out of me. Like instead of color of suit, tie, and material of shoes I'd tell you "sharply dressed."

[Anonymous No.14696801]

>>14696143
No way you can see it that clearly

[Anonymous No.14696809]

>>14696800
You'd probably have a battery of pictures, with more or less subtle differences

[Anonymous No.14696813]

>>14696800
>>14696809
You could even hide it behind "lets try to find the one that fits best"

[Anonymous No.14696815]

>>14696760
You don't see it with your eyes nigger. You visualize it in your mind.

[Anonymous No.14696832]

On the topic of visualization, anybody ever succeeded in visualizing their anima? I got cucked and dreamed mine so I lost control of attempting to consciously construct it.

[Anonymous No.14696841]

>>14696832
My anima talks to me. It keeps saying I'm retarded but doesn't tell me why.

[Anonymous No.14696843]

>>14696832
The pseuds have arrived

[Anonymous No.14696848]

the apple i see is blue and eats souls

[Anonymous No.14696861]

>>14696832
>anybody ever succeeded in visualizing their anima?
Isn't that what Jung called active imagination? Not only you're supposed to do that, but interact with her as well. I believe Jung's red book is his active imaginations written down.
>>14696843
It might sound psuedy (and it might even be) but the anon asked an actually good question.

[Anonymous No.14696985]

>>14696140
Do you people ever daydream and have internal dialogues? I do this a lot. I'll imagine myself in some context talking to someone about something. As per the clarity of visuals I think I see things like '1' in the image but it's hard to tell because it's obviously inside my head. This sort of controversy seems specially made for getting people talking and riled up but maybe that's just a kind of "topic natural selection".

[Anonymous No.14697003]

>>14696985
by "this sort of controversy" I'm also referring to the stuff about women/random people not having internal monologues (which is a topic that has been discussed here recently as of late)

[Anonymous No.14697015]

>>14696985
I’m basically a 5 but I would say I not only have internal monologues but I am never not having them. Many conversations i have irl I’ve had a hundred times in my own head first exploring all the entire dialogue tree that I can conceive

[Anonymous No.14697020]

>>14696985
5 here. I have an internal monologue. I do daydream, but I don't have any visuals to go along with it.

[Anonymous No.14697192]

>>14696760
what are you even trying to say

[Anonymous No.14697254]

>>14696140
I can picture almost like a film of holding an apple and rotating it around in 3d space. Is this abnormal? I've never really thought about the way other people visualize their thoughts before and just kind of assumed most people could do that.

[Anonymous No.14697281]

>>14696159
Newfag can’t memethread

[Anonymous No.14697286]

>>14697254
Yes, I can do that too and have always assumed any sentient being could.

[Anonymous No.14697288]

>>14696140
1, but I can’t stop it from rotating and opening and closing again. Also leaves on the stem. And smell, texture and taste appear randomly.

[Anonymous No.14697334]

>>14696140
I'm surprised nobody is talking about Julian Jaynes' The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind in this thread. While it's not exactly about this phenomenon, it's very relevant to the ability to manipulate visual/auditory information in a way we would consider conscious as well as being able to determine the difference between reality and these thoughts.

[Anonymous No.14697337]

When you people talk in terms of 'clearly' can you explain what you mean by that? I can see an apple in a sort of fragmented way. Like I can see it for a split second then it blinks out then I can see it again. Am I meant to be able to literally hold an image like I'm watching a film or is that basically what the rest of you see?

[Anonymous No.14697348]

>>14697337
That's more or less what I see yes. I can sort of conjure a three dimensional mental image and manipulate it how I wish so long as I can remain focused on it. I work in engineering so this has become incredibly useful to me and seems to be a pretty common trait in my field but I've never really thought about whether this is common in the general public.

[Anonymous No.14697396]

>>14696694
brainlet

[Anonymous No.14697403]

>>14696760
They proved the opposite, actually.

[Anonymous No.14697415]

>>14696140
When I imagine an apple, I thought of that one time that I ate an apple a few days ago, except in my imagination I dropped the apple and suddenly its huge and its rolling all over the floor and I'm running away from the apple.

[Anonymous No.14697421]

>>14696140
>Hurlburt and Schwitzgebel (2006) Describing Inner Experience

I studied cognitive phenomenology for my undergrad thesis. Turns out there is a fairly broad range of ways that different people experience their thoughts and memories.

[Anonymous No.14697441]

>>14697421
Can you recommend some more literature on the topic? I study phenomenology but anything with "cognitive" in the name I assume it's anglo-reductivists and avoid it, so my biases may have blinded me to some good stuff

[Anonymous No.14697459]

>>14696140
How dumb must somebody be to let an image of apples convince them that they are incapable of visualization?

[Anonymous No.14697474]

>>14696801
You don't see it with your eyes. If you can remember an image, you can visualize an apple. I'm sure you've replayed whole scenes in your mind before.

[Anonymous No.14697475]

>>14696143
They’re being petulant
A better query would be to imagine a RED apple, then everyone would see generally the same thing. Twitter posters need attention and it seems funny and cute to them to act like they are deficient in basic tasks but, of course, when put to the test they’d probably act just like any other nobody

[Anonymous No.14697489]

>>14696451
MRI can't prove shot about your subjective experience of brain patterns

[Anonymous No.14697570]

>>14696357
>>14696491
subjective research has shown people can still dream despite being unable to actively visualise things, my own subjective experience is that dreams are worlds apart from anything I can remember or 'visualise'

[Anonymous No.14697649]

>>14697020
When you remember what you saw with your eyes, don't you visualize it? Those are the same type of 'visuals', eyes have nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous No.14697661]

>>14696140
I see a green apple because I have actual taste.

Aside from this I refuse to believe that any human being can lack the ability to visualize a fucking apple. If so, how could you ever possibly retrieve an image to draw something, for example?

Even if your image isn't photorealistic or constant, you do not need an apple sitting in front of you to draw a reasonable approximation of an apple.

[Anonymous No.14697662]

I can easily imagine more details than in 5, and I'm very unimaginative.

[Anonymous No.14697666]

>>14697662
More than in 1*

[Anonymous No.14697690]

>>14696490
>>14696985
>>14696186
Weird this describes my experience pretty gud.
I also see just weird detailed flashes inside my mind when i read. When thinking about an apple i feel and see the texture, i can taste it and smell it
BUT i cant hold that thought for a second so i cant see it clearly like a visual picture.
When i was young i couldnt also stand to read boring descriptions of a room.
When i read of an action scene i usually just emphasize with the emotions of the characters and their stress.

>>14696185
Might be right we dont really know what we´re talking about since we dont have the language and our mind tries to fill ALWAYS the gaps so we hallucinate that our experience is whole.

[Anonymous No.14697812]

>>14696211
I try to paint scenes instead of viewing them as movies.

[Anonymous No.14697863]

>>14696479
Lol what the Fuck? You can’t somewhat control your own imagination?

[Anonymous No.14697914]

>>14696832
my anima is a blue silhouette of a girl with long hair and a dress, it doesnt have any details, but when i imagine dancing with her, i am a red silhouette of a man, with no details either

[Anonymous No.14697926]

>>14697254
for some reason for the image to "hold" it has to move for me, it feels frustrating when trying to imagine an static thing that does nothing

[Anonymous No.14698052]

>>14696140
>>14696183
nakers

[Anonymous No.14698067]

>>14697926
Try imagining the outline, start small. Like, imagine a cube by trying to view it as an arrangement of white lines over a black background. Then apply this to more complex forms. You can also try rotating them in space for a bit, as if you were inspecting it from different angles.

[Anonymous No.14698154]

I lack the ability to visualise entirely. When reading I experience physical/aural sensations; it is more like listening to music than watching a film.

Fwiw, I was tested for various learning difficulties at school and have bottom 10% spatial reasoning. So I'm literally half-retarded.

[Anonymous No.14698159]

>>14696140
I see the apple as 1, but I can't help but feel that I lack imagination. All I can do is recreate objects I've seen in real life and fiction and combine them in an unorganised mess. There's rarely an original thought there that's not merely just a bunch of things I've observed put into a blender. Is this a sign of being a midwit?

>>14696848
This is exactly what I envy. I wish I could come up with my own bizarre and yet coherent and original thoughts rather than merely combining the thoughts of others into one incoherent image.

>>14696832
I regularly interact with my anima, but once again, it's merely a constantly shapeshifting image of various girls both real and fictional rather than a unique girl with a concrete appearance of her own. What's more concerning, my contact with my anima only becomes exceptionally strong and vivid when I'm horny. It's almost as if I my ability to think transcend the material is tied to my lust.

[Anonymous No.14698790]

Can you do this with music? Is it the same thing? Gettigna song stuck in your head is a pretty common phrase, no?
I used to only be able to internally hear one line or instrument at a time, but I eventually learned to imagine/hear polyphony.
I am a musician btw

[Anonymous No.14698797]

Do these people have dream?

[Anonymous No.14698890]

How do people even enjoy music then? Is it just background noise for them?
90% of the time I'm listening to music I visualize things that I associate with the melody and general tone; do people without the ability to visualize just use it as background noise?

[Anonymous No.14699050]

>>14698159
I've interacted with that construct too. I'm not sure that I would call it the anima. That particular creature has a set physical frame, but the face is rapidly shifting through the set of all female faces I have seen as attractive. It's like that gif where you look at the center and the celebrity faces distort into hellish monsters only it is viewed directly and the effect is excitement instead of repulsion. I conceive this thing as the anima locater construct. It's constantly trying to find the anima in my waking life.

My anima met with me after a bad break up. I had a lucid dream and came to a forked road. One way would lead to my ex and the other was an unknown. I took the unknown path and came face to face with a nondescript blonde girl waiting for me. We sat down opposite each other to talk and she changed forms. Her hair turned black and lengthened and her eyes changed from blue to green. Strangest of all, she had a third eye. She grabbed my hand and projected an image into my mind. Nothing too exciting, but a very clear image of somewhere I had never been before. She assured me that one day I would be present where the image came from. It was an unconscious communication to let go and move on to something else after my break up.

I've only seen one girl who came close to matching her, but she was 14 and I was 20 so there was no interest there. I've never been attracted to younger girls, she was the only one.

I know this sounds schizo, but I do believe some part of my consciousness I can't control is unbounded by time. When I was 14 I was walking with this girl I had never even considered dating. I got overwhelmed by this feeling of intense love for her out of nowhere. Strong enough to marry her on the spot and cement my future with her, all over a 3 second timespan. We were just walking side by side. It was so odd and out of character I dismissed it as teenage insanity. I was interested in other girls and dated them that year without this girl crossing my mind again.

Later in high school I would date a girl who shared the same phenotype as her and over time grow the feelings that came to me like an epiphany at 14.

[Anonymous No.14699285]

>>14699050
That mention of dreams hit me hard. I have the exact same experience. I seem to have direct interaction with this girl only in my dreams, yet she takes a radically different appearance each time I see her. Sometimes she has black hair, other times she’s a redhead. Sometimes she’s slim, other times she’s chubby, but I know it’s the same girl deep down.

In my dreams, I get joy from interacting with her, yet my dreams involving her all have a running theme of me losing her. On certain occasions, it’s me failing to muster up the courage to approach her and on other occasions it’s me being in the most beautiful relationship with her only for her to die from either suicide or her sacrificing herself to save me. She’s like a happiness that constantly slips through my fingers like sand. Yet I feel like she’s a sort of guardian angel that constantly watches over me. I’ve spent my entire life trying to figure out where I can find this girl, because I think I remember her saying to me as a child that we’ll meet someday.