4 ms·

> For context, I am completely unable to “see” anything in my mind. I do not dream either. If I close my eyes and think of something, nothing happens visually

by vekker 7y ago

> For context, I am completely unable to “see” anything in my mind. I do not dream either. If I close my eyes and think of something, nothing happens visually Correct me if I'm wrong but I suspect a lot of self-diagnosed cases of aphantasia are due to the ambiguity of language (specifically, English)... Qualia lost in translation. I suspect nobody really sees something visually when thinking/imagining something, in a sober waking state (barring maybe a few rare exceptions or psychotic disorders). If you would see something superimposed on your visual field, with closed eyes or not, that would be called hallucinating. For me, "seeing it in my mind's eye" is a different kind of "seeing": there is no visual input. Example: imagine a tree. Where are the branches? Where are the roots? Where are the leaves? What color do the leaves have? Etc... You can answer these questions, right? The place where you find the answers is where the mind's eye is. I've yet to meet someone who actually sees the tree with the same visual clarity as if looking at an actual tree. Dreaming is somewhere in between for me: it's usually visual, but not of the same visual quality as waking life, except when lucid. A lot of people don't remember their dreams, but that doesn't mean they don't have them. Ask yourself right after waking up in REM sleep (don't even open your eyes if you can): what just happened? What were you thinking?

shele 7y ago
Hehe, perhaps no and this is the moment when you figure out that you have mild aphantasia. When people say they "count sheep jumping over a fence" it's not a metaphor.
- vekker 6y ago
  That's kind of what I've been trying to figure out: when people say they count sheep, do they close their eyes and literally see sheep jumping over a fence as if watching a movie or wearing a VR headset? Even in low resolution... That would be pretty impressive... why would we still need movies and games then? ;) Of course I can imagine sheep jumping over a fence, even in vivid detail, but this imagining is not really seeing visually like in real life, not even like in a dream. As I said, I would describe seeing things that aren't there (with closed eyelids or not) as hallucinating. Perhaps not being able to do that at will is aphantasia, I don't know, but it would blow my mind if it were
  - funnybeam 6y ago
    Generally when I’m idly visualising something it is ‘in my mind’s eye’ as you put it. But if I’m really focused and close my eyes then everything else seems to disappear and I’m ‘really’ seeing it, not on the inside of my eyelids but it encompasses my entire visual perception if that makes sense More rarely I also get it with sounds and then it definitely does feel that the sound is originating externally to my mind You’re right that these experiences are more like hallucinations but I think they are points on a spectrum rather than separate things
quintushoratius 7y ago
> I suspect nobody really sees something visually when thinking/imagining something, I suspect that you may have some degree of aphantasia. Visualizing something encumbers the same visual processing as sight does. Personally I have a hard time visualizing something and looking at something at the same time. I can only pay close attention to inside or outside, not both simultaneously. (Casual attention, like half-listening, is possible otherwise I'd be a terrible driver.) To think of it another way: when you say "I've yet to meet someone who actually sees the tree with the same visual clarity as if looking at an actual tree," maybe you should ask some more. I can look at things, close my eyes, and continue studying them up to the limits of my memory and original attention. Aphantasia seems to come in degrees, not a binary "have it"/"don't have it."
- vekker 6y ago
  Perhaps... what I mean is this: close your eyes and visualize a tree. Do you literally see the tree in the darkness of your closed eyelids in front of you, visually? Even just vaguely? If not, then imho that's not really visual. I "see" the tree, but it's a different kind of seeing. Perhaps that's a degree of aphantasia, but how would I know? ;)
  - wizzwizz4 6y ago
    I do, but I haven't practised the skill much lately so it's not as vivid as it used to be. It's more like a second virtual desktop than superimposed; it takes up the same coordinates, but there's a clear distinction between "real" and "imagined" objects (unless I'm particularly tired, but that's closer to "hallucinating" than "visualising"). I used to be able to visualise things in positions relative to real objects, but at the moment I can only manage floating in the air, such that focusing on the position of imagined objects de-focuses the background, either relative to my field of view (so it moves when I move my head) or in a defined position in space (so it doesn't move when I move my head – though obviously this is limited by my ability to instinctively judge positions and distances, so it often doesn't quite work right when things are moving in complex ways, or I'm moving fast).
patmorgan23 6y ago
When I visualize some thing I don't literally see it in my field of view but I can still 'see' it. It's similar to audition(hearing in your mind). Read something out loud in your mind or play a song in your head. Its the same thing you don't literally hear it but you do 'hear' it.
- vekker 6y ago
  Yes but that was my point: I suspect (I can't be sure of course) that this is a limit of the English language. We call it "seeing", but it's not. If it would be real seeing, you would visually see the thing you are visualizing in your field of view, as if it were literally there (like in a dream).

by vekker 7y ago

shele 7y ago

Hehe, perhaps no and this is the moment when you figure out that you have mild aphantasia. When people say they "count sheep jumping over a fence" it's not a metaphor.

vekker 6y ago
That's kind of what I've been trying to figure out: when people say they count sheep, do they close their eyes and literally see sheep jumping over a fence as if watching a movie or wearing a VR headset? Even in low resolution... That would be pretty impressive... why would we still need movies and games then? ;) Of course I can imagine sheep jumping over a fence, even in vivid detail, but this imagining is not really seeing visually like in real life, not even like in a dream. As I said, I would describe seeing things that aren't there (with closed eyelids or not) as hallucinating. Perhaps not being able to do that at will is aphantasia, I don't know, but it would blow my mind if it were
- funnybeam 6y ago
  Generally when I’m idly visualising something it is ‘in my mind’s eye’ as you put it. But if I’m really focused and close my eyes then everything else seems to disappear and I’m ‘really’ seeing it, not on the inside of my eyelids but it encompasses my entire visual perception if that makes sense More rarely I also get it with sounds and then it definitely does feel that the sound is originating externally to my mind You’re right that these experiences are more like hallucinations but I think they are points on a spectrum rather than separate things

quintushoratius 7y ago

> I suspect nobody really sees something visually when thinking/imagining something, I suspect that you may have some degree of aphantasia. Visualizing something encumbers the same visual processing as sight does. Personally I have a hard time visualizing something and looking at something at the same time. I can only pay close attention to inside or outside, not both simultaneously. (Casual attention, like half-listening, is possible otherwise I'd be a terrible driver.) To think of it another way: when you say "I've yet to meet someone who actually sees the tree with the same visual clarity as if looking at an actual tree," maybe you should ask some more. I can look at things, close my eyes, and continue studying them up to the limits of my memory and original attention. Aphantasia seems to come in degrees, not a binary "have it"/"don't have it."

vekker 6y ago
Perhaps... what I mean is this: close your eyes and visualize a tree. Do you literally see the tree in the darkness of your closed eyelids in front of you, visually? Even just vaguely? If not, then imho that's not really visual. I "see" the tree, but it's a different kind of seeing. Perhaps that's a degree of aphantasia, but how would I know? ;)
- wizzwizz4 6y ago
  I do, but I haven't practised the skill much lately so it's not as vivid as it used to be. It's more like a second virtual desktop than superimposed; it takes up the same coordinates, but there's a clear distinction between "real" and "imagined" objects (unless I'm particularly tired, but that's closer to "hallucinating" than "visualising"). I used to be able to visualise things in positions relative to real objects, but at the moment I can only manage floating in the air, such that focusing on the position of imagined objects de-focuses the background, either relative to my field of view (so it moves when I move my head) or in a defined position in space (so it doesn't move when I move my head – though obviously this is limited by my ability to instinctively judge positions and distances, so it often doesn't quite work right when things are moving in complex ways, or I'm moving fast).

patmorgan23 6y ago

When I visualize some thing I don't literally see it in my field of view but I can still 'see' it. It's similar to audition(hearing in your mind). Read something out loud in your mind or play a song in your head. Its the same thing you don't literally hear it but you do 'hear' it.

vekker 6y ago
Yes but that was my point: I suspect (I can't be sure of course) that this is a limit of the English language. We call it "seeing", but it's not. If it would be real seeing, you would visually see the thing you are visualizing in your field of view, as if it were literally there (like in a dream).