6 ms·

Unless these comments are trolling, it now seems very believable to me that some people talk to Jesus or God and hear back. If you do an atheism-Christianity de

Unless these comments are trolling, it now seems very believable to me that some people talk to Jesus or God and hear back. If you do an atheism-Christianity debate with such a person who actually hears God all the time, you'll have a hard time I guess.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
The amount of such threads I've read here and elsewhere strongly suggests to me than this isn't trolling. I think it's reasonable to conclude that people who claim to talk to God and hear back may actually be experiencing this (though with no actual God being involved). Someone else mentioned rotating 3D shapes in their head, and I think this is a good point of reference. I have somewhat strong aphantasia. On this test image[0], I score 2, maybe 3 on a good day. I've managed 4 when tired. I showed that to my wife the other day and she says she does easy 6. That suddenly explained various arguments we had in the past, that boiled down to me requiring explicit presentation of something that she, as it turns out, was entirely capable of processing in her head. People's minds are diverse. -- [0] - https://i.redd.it/uf5brm3to1e21.png https://i.redd.it/uf5brm3to1e21.png
- bonoboTP 6y ago
  I can do mental rotation quite okay, but it's not really visual. It's kinda in the back of my mind, colorless, faded, greyish etc. but I'm aware of the shape "outline", well not really the outline but just aware of the shape, without actually seeing it. As if you were in a dark room and were feeling out the objects by touch in part (but I am aware of the whole 2d projection at once, unlike touch). I can only really visualize things while drifting to sleep. If people can do that level while awake, that must be awesome. But I do wonder how much of it is about different uses of words by different people. I do have an internal monologue when I want to build sentences, eg crafting a sentence for writing or just imagining talking to someone and trying to convince them as if practicing arguments for a debate (though decidedly not hallucinating someone to talk to). Or when trying to serialize so explicit steps I need to do, I may list them verbally in my mind. I may call this a conversation with an entity, but actually I feel I'm just talking to myself. I identify with the speaker. I guess, and I'm trying now, I can sort of feel as if the stream of sentences is coming from a different entity. It might be that we have very similar (though not equal) experiences we just use different terms and stories to make sense of them. There's a book that argues that Ancient Greeks in the time of Homer also believed their gods talked to them and it might have been something like this. And that the idea of an individual free-will autonomous singular human is a relatively modern cultural concept.
  - Artlav 6y ago
    > But I do wonder how much of it is about different uses of words by different people. There are qualitative differences, however. I think a better question would be not how vivid the imagined shape is, but how connected and contextual it is. Someone might imagine a 6 red star and stop at that, someone might imagine a 3 star, but with the whole Kremlin tower attached on a snowy night with distant car sounds. Testable things i found are looking for reactions. Imagine yourself at the beach, standing half immersed in the sea, enjoying the view, then something grabs your leg underwater. -Did you flinch, or was these just words? Some people would, since they are contextually immersed in the scene. -Can you answer side questions, like how calm the sea was, were you looking towards the land or the horizon, were there any birds in the sky, and so on? Some people can, because they were visualizing the scene, some people won't unless prompted, since they were constructing the scene. In the similar vein, do you project your imagination over the world around you? People who do tend to not comprehend how you can lose things, like forgetting where you parked your car.
    - bonoboTP 6y ago
      I do think there is something to this, but it's exceedingly difficult to communicate about the differences. For example English is not my native language and even though I'm basically fluent as far as understanding any TV show or reading books goes, but I still notice it doesn't reach me as viscerally as speech in my native language. It's blunted, it's like touching things with gloves on. So there is some sort of vividness of ideas, but it's hard to describe. I think people who claim they can visualize something don't actually pixel for pixel visualize it. I read about some study where these people only realized this when followup questions came. I think you can excite your neurons to represent the visual concept of a house without having to expend all the effort to actually create all the parts, decide on the color of window frames, all the small details. Overall I'm torn. I guess there are differences and we should listen to descriptions like these. On the other hand, I also know how unreflective and un-introspective average people can be.
    - saberdancer 6y ago
      "-Can you answer side questions, like how calm the sea was, were you looking towards the land or the horizon, were there any birds in the sky, and so on? Some people can, because they were visualizing the scene, some people won't unless prompted, since they were constructing the scene." - this is exactly it. I seem to be unable to visualize things in my mind. If someone asks me to visualize a beach, I can create a description of a beach and know what exists on the beach, I am able to give an verbal explanation of it. However I do not at any moment see it, nor do I have insight into the beach that I didn't construct. I don't notice that there is a hotel in the distance, but I can think about it and add it in the description. I feel this is very different to what apparently majority of people can do.
- alan_n 6y ago
  I knew there were people who don't see anything, but I would have thought anybody could do 6. I can imagine far more complex 3D stuff (more than rotating, also complex movements) but it's blurry unless I designed it or know the thing/place well (like my house), but I can "zoom" into things to get more detail. You learn something new every day I guess. I wonder if this can be used to predict what fields someone goes into or could go into that they'd be good at (engineering, etc).
  - saberdancer 6y ago
    I asked half a dozen friends. Only one could see more than 1, and in that case they reported only 3. Most of us are in engineering. The one that could see 3 is closest to an artist out of us all. Those of us with strongest engineering background reported 0. Would love to see if there is more to it.
    - bonoboTP 6y ago
      As I said in another comment I think it's a communication issue. I guess it doesn't literally float in front of their eyes as part of the world for those who say 6. Perhaps a better test is how difficult someone finds these exercises: http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/docs/education/institute91/handouts/node20.html http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/docs/education/institute91/handouts... It's less ambiguous than the star thing.
      - TeMPOraL 6y ago
        > As I said in another comment I think it's a communication issue. I guess it doesn't literally float in front of their eyes as part of the world for those who say 6. That's the thing, though: apparently the same thing was being said about internal monologue historically, with people assuming claims contrary to their experience are just turns of a phrase. Until, the legend goes, somebody got enough academics in the same room that they finally realized inner voice is a thing that not everyone has. So I'm leaning towards believing that people claiming they can mock their own visual input actually can do it. (The hardware for that is already there. Despite being 1-2 when awake, every now and then I wake up remembering a dream that was a clear 6.)
- anaerobicover 6y ago
  Very interesting little test. I wonder if you've tried it at different times of the day or different states of mind? The ratio of neurotransmitter chemicals that are dominant in the brain changes widely with different conditions, which affects function. For example, I just tried the test and felt like it was a great effort to visualize the star. I've just had a cup of coffee (similar to amines). But this morning, transitioning from a very restful sleep (when acetylcholine levels would have been high), I was having clear, partially directed mental images, similar to dreams, but wakeful. EDIT: And even more interestingly (to me) I'm having a very _easy_ time with the other exercises you linked below...

TeMPOraL 6y ago

The amount of such threads I've read here and elsewhere strongly suggests to me than this isn't trolling. I think it's reasonable to conclude that people who claim to talk to God and hear back may actually be experiencing this (though with no actual God being involved). Someone else mentioned rotating 3D shapes in their head, and I think this is a good point of reference. I have somewhat strong aphantasia. On this test image[0], I score 2, maybe 3 on a good day. I've managed 4 when tired. I showed that to my wife the other day and she says she does easy 6. That suddenly explained various arguments we had in the past, that boiled down to me requiring explicit presentation of something that she, as it turns out, was entirely capable of processing in her head. People's minds are diverse. -- [0] - https://i.redd.it/uf5brm3to1e21.png https://i.redd.it/uf5brm3to1e21.png

bonoboTP 6y ago
I can do mental rotation quite okay, but it's not really visual. It's kinda in the back of my mind, colorless, faded, greyish etc. but I'm aware of the shape "outline", well not really the outline but just aware of the shape, without actually seeing it. As if you were in a dark room and were feeling out the objects by touch in part (but I am aware of the whole 2d projection at once, unlike touch). I can only really visualize things while drifting to sleep. If people can do that level while awake, that must be awesome. But I do wonder how much of it is about different uses of words by different people. I do have an internal monologue when I want to build sentences, eg crafting a sentence for writing or just imagining talking to someone and trying to convince them as if practicing arguments for a debate (though decidedly not hallucinating someone to talk to). Or when trying to serialize so explicit steps I need to do, I may list them verbally in my mind. I may call this a conversation with an entity, but actually I feel I'm just talking to myself. I identify with the speaker. I guess, and I'm trying now, I can sort of feel as if the stream of sentences is coming from a different entity. It might be that we have very similar (though not equal) experiences we just use different terms and stories to make sense of them. There's a book that argues that Ancient Greeks in the time of Homer also believed their gods talked to them and it might have been something like this. And that the idea of an individual free-will autonomous singular human is a relatively modern cultural concept.
- Artlav 6y ago
  > But I do wonder how much of it is about different uses of words by different people. There are qualitative differences, however. I think a better question would be not how vivid the imagined shape is, but how connected and contextual it is. Someone might imagine a 6 red star and stop at that, someone might imagine a 3 star, but with the whole Kremlin tower attached on a snowy night with distant car sounds. Testable things i found are looking for reactions. Imagine yourself at the beach, standing half immersed in the sea, enjoying the view, then something grabs your leg underwater. -Did you flinch, or was these just words? Some people would, since they are contextually immersed in the scene. -Can you answer side questions, like how calm the sea was, were you looking towards the land or the horizon, were there any birds in the sky, and so on? Some people can, because they were visualizing the scene, some people won't unless prompted, since they were constructing the scene. In the similar vein, do you project your imagination over the world around you? People who do tend to not comprehend how you can lose things, like forgetting where you parked your car.
  - bonoboTP 6y ago
    I do think there is something to this, but it's exceedingly difficult to communicate about the differences. For example English is not my native language and even though I'm basically fluent as far as understanding any TV show or reading books goes, but I still notice it doesn't reach me as viscerally as speech in my native language. It's blunted, it's like touching things with gloves on. So there is some sort of vividness of ideas, but it's hard to describe. I think people who claim they can visualize something don't actually pixel for pixel visualize it. I read about some study where these people only realized this when followup questions came. I think you can excite your neurons to represent the visual concept of a house without having to expend all the effort to actually create all the parts, decide on the color of window frames, all the small details. Overall I'm torn. I guess there are differences and we should listen to descriptions like these. On the other hand, I also know how unreflective and un-introspective average people can be.
  - saberdancer 6y ago
    "-Can you answer side questions, like how calm the sea was, were you looking towards the land or the horizon, were there any birds in the sky, and so on? Some people can, because they were visualizing the scene, some people won't unless prompted, since they were constructing the scene." - this is exactly it. I seem to be unable to visualize things in my mind. If someone asks me to visualize a beach, I can create a description of a beach and know what exists on the beach, I am able to give an verbal explanation of it. However I do not at any moment see it, nor do I have insight into the beach that I didn't construct. I don't notice that there is a hotel in the distance, but I can think about it and add it in the description. I feel this is very different to what apparently majority of people can do.
alan_n 6y ago
I knew there were people who don't see anything, but I would have thought anybody could do 6. I can imagine far more complex 3D stuff (more than rotating, also complex movements) but it's blurry unless I designed it or know the thing/place well (like my house), but I can "zoom" into things to get more detail. You learn something new every day I guess. I wonder if this can be used to predict what fields someone goes into or could go into that they'd be good at (engineering, etc).
- saberdancer 6y ago
  I asked half a dozen friends. Only one could see more than 1, and in that case they reported only 3. Most of us are in engineering. The one that could see 3 is closest to an artist out of us all. Those of us with strongest engineering background reported 0. Would love to see if there is more to it.
  - bonoboTP 6y ago
    As I said in another comment I think it's a communication issue. I guess it doesn't literally float in front of their eyes as part of the world for those who say 6. Perhaps a better test is how difficult someone finds these exercises: http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/docs/education/institute91/handouts/node20.html http://www.geom.uiuc.edu/docs/education/institute91/handouts... It's less ambiguous than the star thing.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      > As I said in another comment I think it's a communication issue. I guess it doesn't literally float in front of their eyes as part of the world for those who say 6. That's the thing, though: apparently the same thing was being said about internal monologue historically, with people assuming claims contrary to their experience are just turns of a phrase. Until, the legend goes, somebody got enough academics in the same room that they finally realized inner voice is a thing that not everyone has. So I'm leaning towards believing that people claiming they can mock their own visual input actually can do it. (The hardware for that is already there. Despite being 1-2 when awake, every now and then I wake up remembering a dream that was a clear 6.)
anaerobicover 6y ago
Very interesting little test. I wonder if you've tried it at different times of the day or different states of mind? The ratio of neurotransmitter chemicals that are dominant in the brain changes widely with different conditions, which affects function. For example, I just tried the test and felt like it was a great effort to visualize the star. I've just had a cup of coffee (similar to amines). But this morning, transitioning from a very restful sleep (when acetylcholine levels would have been high), I was having clear, partially directed mental images, similar to dreams, but wakeful. EDIT: And even more interestingly (to me) I'm having a very _easy_ time with the other exercises you linked below...