People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study • Hacker News Board

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#61

Post by cortic » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

jjk166 wrote: post #55

cortic wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its likly to be largely an illusion; There was a talk from a neurologist years ago, when he demonstrated that mental images don't act like real images. If you picture something like a pirate, and someone asked you about the scene, eg; what color are his trousers, what kind of shirt.. You will get a question that you don't instantly know, your mind will quickly 'colour/paint in' so you can answer, but the important pa…

Look at your computer screen. Really take it in. Where is the banner? Where is the exit button? What is the color of your underwear? Perhaps you will remember what color underwear you put on this morning, perhaps you will check, but it would be pretty weird if your underwear's color was constantly on your mind. Nevertheless, I doubt you would argue that your underwear did not have color while you weren't thinking of…

I think you are cheating a bit, first the instruction was to picture a pirate, not a bit of one. Second, the exercises purpose is to demonstrate that missing information in an image is obvious whereas missing information in a mental image is not.

And the point is that picturing something to many feels the same as looking at a picture, but in actual fact that feeling is an illusion.

>my perception of my visual thoughts is the same as my perception of the visible world.

If this were true, you would not know when the picture of the pirate was partially off the screen. Or conversely you would know that the mental image of the pirate had no trousers before being asked.

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#62

Post by Balgair » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:39 PM UTC

throw1234651234 wrote: post #36

greenonions wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and there are no real limits to this. I can picture a Rubik's cube dominating the Manhattan skyline. I can also picture abstract images with no connection to the real world, that have emotions associated with them. I believe my wife cannot make images, and the differences between us that result are pretty wild. I'm dramatically better with directions and maps because she can't make a mental model of the map and…

Can you draw what you visualize? Can you recall a face exactly and draw it? As an amateur artist, I don't think there is as much "mechanical skill" in art, as there is clearly imagining what you are trying to draw. Any time anyone claims to be able to visualize, I ask them this question. To be clear, I am not "challenging" you in any sense, but it's a good reality check. Anyway - I am the same with maps, I can easily…

No OP, but I fall into the camp that can draw/sculpt/paint/etc what my mind's eye produces. I'm not as good a sculptor as a painter, but I can generally paint a face/landscape/car/etc that my brain is seeing, at least to a degree that I am satisfied with. Paintings take a long time to get 'good'.

Getting better at drawing and creating takes time and practice. I'd go on youtube to take a look at how to get better quickly, there's a lot of good people on YT that are happy to share and teach.

One good 'cheat' is to use a camera lumisia or a reference mirror to see how light interacts with your media directly: https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2013/11/vermeer-secret-to...

I'm likely an outlier though, as I'm a synesthete and my senses get a bit mixed up from time to time. So take that into account.

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#63

Post by falsaberN1 » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:43 PM UTC

3f34f34f wrote: post #57

falsaberN1 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, closing your eyes and being in a dark room has the same effect (to me at least). As I mentioned in another reply I think it's simply because there's no visual input to process so your mind can focus on images better/more efficiently. After all a decent amount of processing comes from visual input, I figure that's what makes stuff like a Rorschach test or cloudgazing to be a thing, or certain optical illusions. Y…

I'm talking about literally seeing the image, not being able to better internally visualise the image in the dark. If you are able to literally see images in the dark as if light was bouncing off of them, that's hallucinating and I don't think we're talking about the same thing then. If you are actually able to hallucinate on command I'd be very surprised. That would be like lucid dreaming while awake and I'd imagine…

Oh then definitely not. As I replied earlier there's no real weight to any image I might be thinking about. I had a case of sleep paralysis or whatever it's called once and hallucinated someone standing at my door, and even thought it was persistent and made sense it faded over time until I was just left with a "what was that?". It's nothing like that at all.

Even if you can think of an object, even complex ones, and determine through a visual method its properties, shapes and colors, it's "nowhere" relative to real life visuals. You could be spinning in place or blind and you can still visualize the image. I could think of a scene with a very bright light but I'm really thinking of a white color or a gradient, it's obviously not going to blind me because it's now flowing through my optic nerves. I mean I can do something like divide a screen in two regions with an imaginary line, but it's not some sort of futuristic HUD.

That's kinda why I think there's some relation between our ability to mentally visualize an image and the ability to recognize a face or find shapes in stuff like Rorschach tests. In other words I think everyone has the ability to visualize images mentally, they just don't exploit it because maybe they put more weight on other details. Where I can remember and play with images and sounds mentally with no effort, other people can remember huge amounts of text, or do complex math instead. It might be a matter of specialization, perhaps?

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#64

Post by 3f34f34f » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:46 PM UTC

JshWright wrote: post #58

3f34f34f wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking about literally seeing the image, not being able to better internally visualise the image in the dark. If you are able to literally see images in the dark as if light was bouncing off of them, that's hallucinating and I don't think we're talking about the same thing then. If you are actually able to hallucinate on command I'd be very surprised. That would be like lucid dreaming while awake and I'd imagine…

As far as I can tell, you're the only one moving the goalpost from "internally visualize" to "actually see the object manifested in front of you". I don't think anyone is claiming that the latter is widespread, and I also don't think you're acknowledging that there are many people who can't do the former at all (myself included). If you ask me to imagine something, there is no visual component to that at all for me.…

I probably was moving goalposts, but it's just one of those issues where it's hard to communicate with each other. I guess i'm not very good at visualising other people's experiences :p

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#65

Post by JshWright » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:48 PM UTC

pengaru wrote: post #42

Teaching people how to tie even simple knots is effective at distinguishing the visual from non-visual thinkers. It's one of the interesting aspects of going sailing.

I'm pretty convinced I experience aphantasia (never been clincially tested), I can't even fathom what it means to "visualize" something.

I'm also very good at knot tying. It's a hobby I enjoy, and a practical skill in rope rescue activities I participate in. Knot typing seems much more "spatial" than "visual" to me.

Interestingly, the article specifically mentions differences in spatial abilities as not being correlated to the ability to visualize.

"But other aspects of the findings suggest self-reporting may not be biasing the results that significantly: there were variations in answers coupled with data suggesting that spatial abilities - an ability to map relationships and distances between objects - appear to be unaffected in the volunteers."

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#66

Post by JshWright » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 6:53 PM UTC

3f34f34f wrote: post #64

JshWright wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, you're the only one moving the goalpost from "internally visualize" to "actually see the object manifested in front of you". I don't think anyone is claiming that the latter is widespread, and I also don't think you're acknowledging that there are many people who can't do the former at all (myself included). If you ask me to imagine something, there is no visual component to that at all for me.…

I probably was moving goalposts, but it's just one of those issues where it's hard to communicate with each other. I guess i'm not very good at visualising other people's experiences :p

I guess I should clarify that I don't think you were arguing in bad-faith ("moving the goalposts" is a bit a of a charged phrase in the current political climate). I appreciate the conversation!

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#67

Post by throw1234651234 » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 7:07 PM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #10

throw1234651234 wrote: post #2

"Not everyone can see pictures in their minds when they close their eyes and summon thoughts - an ability many of us take for granted." I used to be into visualization as focus training. I can't "see" and change (move, change color) shapes in my mind at all. Artists I know claim to be able to do this. Obviously, Tesla (, Nikola) supposedly did this. For those who can do it - to what degree can you do it? Can you imag…

As complete as it needs to be. I can see and hear my imaginings quite clearly, and often use mechanical analogues to test non-directly visualisable abstract ideas and logical flows. In more general terms, I can see and explore real and imagined environments, and listen to music with perfect fidelity - although doing the hearing bit only works well with considerable focus, and peace and quiet - visual I find easy enou…

I have a very hard time believing claims like this. Not to single you out, but you should be able to draw perfectly then and imagine whole systems in your mind.

The latter is especially unlikely given that most people are limited to 5-7 "items" in their working memory. To design even a simple system, e.g. a brake caliper, that's way more than 7 items, and they aren't "atomic" items either.

Again, this isn't a stab at you, this is a stab at the concept, because it's kind of like people saying they can put on 5lb of muscle a month without roiding. Sets false expectations.

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#68

Post by ajju » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 7:09 PM UTC

JshWright wrote: post #58

3f34f34f wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm talking about literally seeing the image, not being able to better internally visualise the image in the dark. If you are able to literally see images in the dark as if light was bouncing off of them, that's hallucinating and I don't think we're talking about the same thing then. If you are actually able to hallucinate on command I'd be very surprised. That would be like lucid dreaming while awake and I'd imagine…

As far as I can tell, you're the only one moving the goalpost from "internally visualize" to "actually see the object manifested in front of you". I don't think anyone is claiming that the latter is widespread, and I also don't think you're acknowledging that there are many people who can't do the former at all (myself included). If you ask me to imagine something, there is no visual component to that at all for me.…

This is such a civil discussion and debate. I don’t even know you folks but I am more optimistic about our future as a society because of this thread.

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#69

Post by jpindar » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 7:15 PM UTC

falsaberN1 wrote: post #51

3f34f34f wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most people and journalists who speak about aphantasia are exaggerating or misleading others. If you actually are able to imagine an picture with your eyes open and have it cover the real world, that's called hallucinating. Some people can visualise things stronger than others, some cannot at all, but let's not pretend like actual visualisation (hallucinating) is the norm or that more than a few people on ear…

I never heard of aphantasia before but having read a bit about it, doesn't seem to be the same thing. When I "see" things mentally it's not like it "takes over" my visual input, nor it has weight in the real world. The image seems to be "nowhere", like when dreaming. Closing my eyes doesn't really make the image clearer by itself, it's more like there's no visual input to interrupt my visualization and that's what ma…

It's as if the image from your memory/imagination appears on a different monitor than the signal from your eyes.

Re: People who can't see things in their mind could have memory trouble too: study

#70

Post by function_seven » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 7:23 PM UTC

3f34f34f wrote: post #64

JshWright wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, you're the only one moving the goalpost from "internally visualize" to "actually see the object manifested in front of you". I don't think anyone is claiming that the latter is widespread, and I also don't think you're acknowledging that there are many people who can't do the former at all (myself included). If you ask me to imagine something, there is no visual component to that at all for me.…

I probably was moving goalposts, but it's just one of those issues where it's hard to communicate with each other. I guess i'm not very good at visualising other people's experiences :p

So we have a meta-problem of different abilities to visualize or imagine the concepts of visualization :)

Sorry, but this is too funny. There's some sort of fundamental difficulty when humans are trying to compare their varying (or not?) qualia.

Like those stoner-philosphy questions. ("Is the 'red' I see the same hue as the 'red' you see? How would we ever know??")

There's an element of that unsolvable problem here; of knowing whether the other person is describing their internal mental state using the same definitions as you are.