3 ms·

> Appealing to evolutionary biology - since aphantasia appears to be a persistent trait in humans which would seem to have obvious costs, it's logical to assume

> Appealing to evolutionary biology - since aphantasia appears to be a persistent trait in humans which would seem to have obvious costs, it's logical to assume there are benefits somewhere to make up the balance. Is that logical? I think the most logical thing would be to ask: does it impair the individual's ability to reproduce, or the health of their children? I don't think it does - people with aphantasia seem to function relatively normally in that respect. Thus I don't think it would be that heavily selected for or against. Sometimes things evolution produces are bad but not that bad, so they stick around because there's not enough pressure to make them go away.

cartoonfoxes 5y ago
We're living in a novel environment. Being unable to imagine the juxtaposition of rocks which would shield your turned back from view of the sabertooth tiger, for example, could have very different outcomes depending on which side of the last ice age you were born into. edit: Also consider "impaired" vs "less fit". The absence of the trait might not be actively harmful to the individual, and yet enhance reproductive success of those who have it. Not having it among a population who do is a kind of cost.
- Brian_K_White 5y ago
  Just to point out it's not simple and any differentiating characteristic could be not only different levels of net negative, but could also be net positive, even something like the absense of a capability. Lack of a facility seems like it can only be a net negative, almost no matter what the facility is, but life is not simple like that and there could be any number of processes by which an ability creates a net liability in some context or environment. A crude and not to be taken literally please example would be something like the ability to imagine comes attached to an increased level of distraction or inattention. Maybe the insights and creativity from the imagination pays enough dividends to be worth more than the occasional accident costs, or maybe in some environment the accidents or missed observations cost more. And the effects from posessing or not posessing any given trait, including an ability, could be something like 600 different positive effects and 600 different negative effects, and they all weigh differently, and most of them no one can even guess at let alone quantify, making it as good as pointless to try to talk about.

cartoonfoxes 5y ago

We're living in a novel environment. Being unable to imagine the juxtaposition of rocks which would shield your turned back from view of the sabertooth tiger, for example, could have very different outcomes depending on which side of the last ice age you were born into. edit: Also consider "impaired" vs "less fit". The absence of the trait might not be actively harmful to the individual, and yet enhance reproductive success of those who have it. Not having it among a population who do is a kind of cost.

Brian_K_White 5y ago
Just to point out it's not simple and any differentiating characteristic could be not only different levels of net negative, but could also be net positive, even something like the absense of a capability. Lack of a facility seems like it can only be a net negative, almost no matter what the facility is, but life is not simple like that and there could be any number of processes by which an ability creates a net liability in some context or environment. A crude and not to be taken literally please example would be something like the ability to imagine comes attached to an increased level of distraction or inattention. Maybe the insights and creativity from the imagination pays enough dividends to be worth more than the occasional accident costs, or maybe in some environment the accidents or missed observations cost more. And the effects from posessing or not posessing any given trait, including an ability, could be something like 600 different positive effects and 600 different negative effects, and they all weigh differently, and most of them no one can even guess at let alone quantify, making it as good as pointless to try to talk about.