Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article uses the VVIQ test (Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire), taken on the Internet, to select aphantasiac participants. I cannot take research like that seriously. > For example: imagine a triangle. What color is it? > For a true aphantasiac, this question is meaningless. If you are not an aphantasiac, how do you know what meaning this question has for one? I am pretty sure aphantasiacs can "imagine" a…
If I say "imagine a triangle" and ask you what color it is, why would it have a color if there is no image there? I didn't ask you to imagine a red triangle. Only a triangle. The only way it logically gets a color is if you are visualizing it.
This void is a 3D space. There is a general sense of up, down, left, right, front and back.
In this void I materialize a triangle. It is a wireframe. 3 lines, all the same length. No color, they are just lines.
By default the triangle is resting on one side, pointing up, and facing me. I can then rotate and move my mind "camera" around it while simultaneously rotating and moving the triangle as well.
The more complex the shapes, the more shapes, the harder it is to maintain coherency. I can close my eyes and concentrate to help.
I can assign colors if I wish to, but they are not really there visually. More like an extra information attached to the shape.