/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10536351
I struggle to even call this "conceptual thinking" fully cause its possible even for the most simple concrete thoughts and actions and intents.

You just "get" the idea and know what to do, and can delay it too, but return back to it. No words/images neceassary but it isn't all necessarily conceptual

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/pristine-inner-experience/201111/thinking-without-words
This article calls it "unsymbolized" thinking, maybe that would be a better explanation

>To qualify as an unsymbolized thought, the thought must be directly experienced, just as directly experienced as would be an inner speaking or the seeing of an image. That is, you don't merely infer the existence of an unsymbolized thought (I must have been wondering what Feature 5 is). If this is an unsymbolized thought, you directly apprehend the thought as an experience before the footlights of consciousness at the moment it is occurring.

>at the footlights of consciousness
That was the best way to put it into words that I've encountered yet too. So anything concrete, or anything abstract and multi-layered, conceptual and subtle its all just perceived at the "footlights of consciousness"

The word/image aspect of thought lagging behind this instantly experienced thought is not to be overlooked either, that kinda clues things in a bit better I think. In that this form of thinking is just pure "thought" without the word/image associated with it, what I'm curious about is how this arises, I was born with it, but can it be trained, what are the neural correlates for this specific thinking method fuck

Anyone else who thinks this way all the time or partially, gimme your fucking thoughts

>>10510449
>>10510398
Actually when you think about it, a common experience we all share regardless of thinking method is having a word in mind to say but being unable to remember it (tip of the tongue phenomenon) this means that you have a concept already in mind but lack the word to share the concept with the person you are speaking to and thus cannot communicate it despite you yourself comprehending and understanding the general concept of what you're trying to say otherwise you would not be struggling to find the right word you need to share it.

Further proof this kind of conceptual thinking is normal, it can probably be trained, though I'm not sure how. In the same way you can train your visualization skills by mental imagery exercise and repetition, and in the same way I taught myself and trained myself to think more verbally and utilize inner monologue, you can probably also train this non-verbal conceptual method of thinking, only its very difficult to explain with words how to train yourself to utilize non-verbal thinking because I'm not even quite sure how it happens myself.

>>10500887
Why do some infections start off with vomiting and then proceed to do completely unrelated things for the rest of the time?

>>9760532
Because our current understanding of reality is a approximation via stuff that "kinda" works and the more shit piles up the less sense everything makes. In 100 years some guy is going to get a brilliant idea that will render all science of the last 200 years from then on moot and hopelessly outdated, making future people look back in bewilderment how we even managed to build calculators when everything we did was wrong, retroactively rendering billions of scientists' life achievements completely pointless because they wasted their lives playing a very complex game of sudoku. But at least they were happy doing it.

>>9631254
>Dark matter holds our whole galaxy together with its gravity
>yet for some magical reason it can't clump to itself

>>9129757
But if you split a quark, what do you get?

>>8844531

jesus christ what a (shit)post

Wow cool shit