Not everyone has an internal monologue • Hacker News Board

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#321

Post by lqet » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 10:59 PM UTC

thinkingemote wrote: post #316

lqet wrote: post #314

I have a serious question to people here describing themselves (as I understand it) as thinking in words and whole sentences: How can you think about concepts which cannot be put into words or for which no words exist? Do you have to come up with elaborate verbal descriptions of abstract concepts in your head before you can think about them? If so, don't you think that any verbal description is essentially incomplete…

I would imagine the answer would be; the same way you would talk about the concepts out loud to someone else.

> the same way you would talk about the concepts out loud to someone else.

But isn't this extremely exhausting and time-consuming? And if it indeed works this way, then where do you think the idea you are trying to formulate in your inner monologue comes from?

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#322

Post by LordFast » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 10:59 PM UTC

Elof wrote: post #282

Elof wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also ADHD and experience the world in a similar but slightly different way. All my narratives are about potential immediate futures and how they might tweak the longer term outcomes. It's interesting but insanely draining and often depressing. Since I've noticed this about my self I've been intentionally trying to take steps to slow my thoughts and be in the moment, but when I do I'm constituently thinking about how…

Another thing that happens is that when someone else is talking a lot of the time I've already thought through what they are saying to the point that they don't even need to say it for our conversation to continue and keep track. This makes me extremely annoyed by people I deem long winded. I used to try and hurry the conversation along, but it turns out people don't like that and it definitely makes me look like an…

"Get to the point, will ya?!"

Vice versa, for the past couple of years I've started practicing verbally walking people through my entire thought process from beginning to end. I found that this has been useful in eliminating misunderstandings. It's tiring though, I'll give you that, so I only do it when I believe that it will have long-term positive impact.

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#323

Post by rapnie » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 10:59 PM UTC

feanaro wrote: post #204

jerf wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably less of a difference than you might think. Dreams are generally less detailed than you might think from their portrayal on TV. What they are really good at are convincing the dreamers that they are a great deal more detailed than they really are, because they're on the "inside" of the cognition; you might "see" a vaguely round blotch of color like what you may see when you close your eyes, but you cogni…

How do you differentiate between the dreams being detailed and the dreamers simply being convinced of the dreams being detailed? It's certainly my impression that my dreams are extremely visually detailed, to the point that I'm often able to read things in dreams (and remember it later).

This is interesting. I hear from others that their dreams are very mundane, i.e. very similar to real life. Mine are very crazy, absurd adventures. Very fun and mind-blowing to remember them when waking up, so I am training my dream recall. In my dreams familiar people from all stages in my life meet together. I always thought I dreamt them in great detail, but I have now learnt that only their 'essence' is there. Just enough for me to know as a fact it is them.

I am also trying to become a lucid dreamer (with full awareness during the dream). I succeeded several times, but only very briefly. The excitement causes me to wake up. But the best way for me to know I'm in a dream is when I am reading some text. Texts are inconsistent and when I reread a sentence it might be completely changed.

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#324

Post by rrobukef » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 10:59 PM UTC

daveslash wrote: post #240

donatj wrote: post #107

For myself personally, it depends on what I'm thinking about. Thinking about writing this sentence, I hear each of the words I'm going to type in my head before I type them. However, if I'm working out how to assemble a table, I'm not hearing "And now I screw the leg on" I just abstractly know that's what I'm going to do. I have to imagine that's the case for at least most people. Thinking out complicated abstract co…

Came to make the same comment. Normally, I avoid giving the "Me Too!" comments, but I think in this context it's appropriate. If I'm casually thinking about life, the universe, and everything then I typically have a monologue. I don't "hear" it, per say, but I am thinking in sentence structure. If I'm analyzing a problem, working on a project, or trying to digest a situation, then I do not think in such sentence like…

I think Ihave control over how I think. An internal monologue is great for remembering in order. But I rebuild as an image of keywords which is great for connecting but the words blur. I rebuild as a map to navigate with a mental car. I rebuild as a shape to trigger my eyes, a sound for my ears...

However the last week I've been stuck on naming "a complete thought", not just a vision which is just an image. But one that breaks through unconnected to any sense. A thought so full that it first needs to be unpacked in language, image, shapes and steps before it can be expressed. Thus like the article: does anyone else have this? Does anyone have a name for it?

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#325

Post by cosmojg » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:02 PM UTC

kordlessagain wrote: post #171

zelly wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't healthy. You should go on a meditation retreat. Or drop acid. This is what Buddhist monks call the monkey mind syndrome.

LSD only gives temporary relief and is hard to get. Shroons might be a better route.

Luckily legal prodrugs of LSD exist, compounds which metabolize into LSD before reaching the brain like 1P-LSD and ALD-52. In the United States, you can order these off the clearnet without fear of legal repercussions, unlike shrooms. (although psilocin has its own collection of legal prodrugs available including, for example, 5-MeO-DMT and 4-HO-MET).

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#326

Post by sushisource » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:03 PM UTC

lqet wrote: post #321

thinkingemote wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would imagine the answer would be; the same way you would talk about the concepts out loud to someone else.

> the same way you would talk about the concepts out loud to someone else. But isn't this extremely exhausting and time-consuming? And if it indeed works this way, then where do you think the idea you are trying to formulate in your inner monologue comes from?

I suspect the author is exaggerating a bit when he says it's the only way he thinks. I also have the "narrative voice" but I absolutely can think about things without the voice, it just doesn't feel as much like "thinking", if that makes sense.

There are some things that are explicitly visualized, like an object I'm thinking about, where I wouldn't say in my head "I am imagining the sun. It is bright. Etc. etc.". I'd just picture the sun, and my "narrative" would probably be about why I was thinking about the sun, not describing it.

Same applies for more abstract concepts, just without the visualization.

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#327

Post by megiddo » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:04 PM UTC

lqet wrote: post #314

I have a serious question to people here describing themselves (as I understand it) as thinking in words and whole sentences: How can you think about concepts which cannot be put into words or for which no words exist? Do you have to come up with elaborate verbal descriptions of abstract concepts in your head before you can think about them? If so, don't you think that any verbal description is essentially incomplete…

I use both modes. For speaking to people directly, I use an internal monologue. For coding or abstract though, I can feel the model.

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#328

Post by _y5hn » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:08 PM UTC

keenmaster wrote: post #311

pazimzadeh wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am surprised that you said others can suspect ulterior motives, because that started happening to me but I can't figure out what the connection is. Can you expand on that?

I have learned to be cautious with two very different types of people (this is not a scientific exercise, take with a grain of salt): - One is people who are constantly negative and cast stones everywhere, but offset that negativity with charm. They can accrue a network of Stockholm-esque followers that would say "he's not an asshole, he's actually a really sweet person." When they perceive a threat from you, or they…

For 1 alot of info on "gaslighting" online.

For 2, there needs to be reciprocity and honesty (even silent). We shouldn't regard ourselves as below/above, but may be ingrained and diminishing.

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#329

Post by duskwuff » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:09 PM UTC

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #26

Something I discovered within the past year is that if I know a song fairly well, I can "play it" silently in my head, and be entertained. The experience isn't quite as emotionally resonate as listening with headphones, but it's not so far off either. It's useful when I'm bored. ...can anyone else do this? I actually find it supremely weird.

This is reasonably common, especially among people with musical training. Some particularly gifted musicians can even parallelize the process:

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/14867...

Re: Not everyone has an internal monologue

#330

Post by Strom » Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 11:10 PM UTC

lqet wrote: post #314

I have a serious question to people here describing themselves (as I understand it) as thinking in words and whole sentences: How can you think about concepts which cannot be put into words or for which no words exist? Do you have to come up with elaborate verbal descriptions of abstract concepts in your head before you can think about them? If so, don't you think that any verbal description is essentially incomplete…

I think with words, in multiple languages, but they're silent. I can't actually hear anything. Importantly though, the verbalizing is a later stage of thinking. First there is the thought, seemingly instant, non-verbalized, and fuzzy. If needed, I can already act based on that thought without verbalizing. However if I verbalize it in my head, then that allows for further analysis that may lead me to override the initial guessed value of the thought. Not everything can be verbalized easily though. I also heavily think in pictures. Pretty much exclusively scenes/objects from my memories. Sometimes remixed a bit, but nothing completely novel.