4 ms·

Thank you for your response, it is nice to hear from someone who considers themselves to have aphantasia. With "ego" I meant to refer to people boasting about

by smokel 3y ago

Thank you for your response, it is nice to hear from someone who considers themselves to have aphantasia. With "ego" I meant to refer to people boasting about their abilities to visualize everything to the greatest amount of detail in their heads, which to me seems likely untrue except for very rare cases. I think reported phantasia (as opposed to aphantasia, and if there is such a word) is in a way similar to clairvoyancy or having a sixth sense. Some people report having such a gift, but it is very hard to test if that really exists, and up to what level. The end result may be that a lot of people consider themselves aphantasic, because they lack an internal Unity engine. As a simple proof that visual phantasy has its limits, consider artists who paint fantasy with oil paint and put in lighting and shadows. This is typically either very bad, or based on photographic reference images. Artists who are, by exception, fairly good at this, require insane amounts of training. There are always strange exceptions, but these seem to be one in a million. (Stephen Wiltshire and Kim Jung Gi come to mind, but even they do not perform accurate shading). Obviously all misunderstanding is probably based on me not knowing a clear definition for aphantasia, and I should read more about it. Does it mean that a person is unable, even with a lot of training, to form any visual images in their heads? This would seem either unlikely, or related to memory problems, such as you describe. In the latter case, is aphantasia simply a symptom or result of the memory problem, or is it a phenomenon by itself? Again, I am skeptical, I am not denying that it exists (but perhaps not as much as self-reported on HN and Reddit). And I most certainly would not want to hurt anyone's feelings if they suffer from it! My apologies if that is the case, and please point out if I'm continuing to do so. (For reference: I am a trained visual artist and mathematician -- I can visualize and draw pretty decent images, and read and write code. I know there's a difference in working with these, but I doubt it's as big as some people make me want to believe.)

lll-o-lll 3y ago
I don’t think many programmers have this issue, I haven’t met another in real life. I certainly don’t think it’s an advantage for software development in general, many of the best developers I’ve worked with over the years have been extremely visual in their thinking (one guy would close his eyes whenever you were describing how something should work so that he could translate to visual, another would only describe things with whiteboard marker in hand, drawing pictures as he went). In fact, I’m very grateful for having been taught by them to design visually early on in my career. I’m mid 40s, and a core part of the value I deliver in my current role is drawing pictures. I realised my brain worked differently when I was about 21 and went to see a psychologist. He asked me to close my eyes and picture my mothers face. I couldn’t do it, and he then asked me to picture some other things and I couldn’t do any of it. There was no name for this condition back then, and both he and I were surprised. I was surprised he was asking me to do things that were obviously impossible, and he was surprised I couldn’t do something that everyone can obviously do. Since then I’ve talked to many people about the “minds eye” and how they perceive things. I’ve never met another like me, but there seems to be a large degree of variance in how detailed or vivid this mental imagery is for individuals. I married very young (25), and my wife is the other extreme. It turned out that she has ASD, and thinks mostly in pictures. She always had auditory processing delay, and part of the reason for that is that words all create images in her head. The delay is partly because there is an automatic translation between words to images going on. She can see images in her head with incredible vividness and detail, and can dial up the detail as needed. She also can’t do algebra to save her life; if she can’t picture it she can’t think about it. We watched a talk from Temple Grandin a few years ago (an autistic PHD), and she described a very similar experience. I really do think there is wide variance in how brains work. The lack of auto-biographical memory is something that seems to be commonly associated with my condition, and this part is clearly mostly downside. I still have semantic memory, so I can remember all the facts about things that have happened. They just don’t have visual or emotional content. But semantic memory needs to be consciously created, by which I mean that I have to be trying to remember as I go if anything is to be committed to long term memory. So most of what has happened in my life is irretrievably lost to me. I’m fortunate that I married young, because my wife remembers everything in vivid detail, and I love to hear the stories about things we’ve done together. Answering some of your questions: > Does it mean that a person is unable, even with a lot of training, to form any visual images in their heads? I have tried the training designed to help with forming mental imagery. This involves doing things like looking at something bright and then closing your eyes so that you have the “after image” and then trying to keep it around. So far I haven’t had any luck, but I do hope that I might still have success one day. I’ve read of other people with my condition being able to learn mental imagery this way, so it must work for some people at least. > This would seem either unlikely, or related to memory problems, such as you describe. I’m not sure why you think this is unlikely, to me this is obviously as normal as can be. As I said before, there is a clear association with the lack of auto-biographical memory based on what I read online. It could be some form of brain-damage I experience, but I don’t think this is the case. I think there is just a huge amount of variation in how peoples minds work!
- smokel 3y ago
  Thanks again for taking the time to elaborate. I would not have assumed that being able to see an "after image" was related to this -- I had always assumed that that phenomenon was due to sensory overload. There is still a lot to learn :) I read that most people with aphantasia do have visual dreams [1], which I found interesting. In some period of my life I used to have nightmares about my grandmother (who had died many years before), and I remember seeing here face very vividly, as if the entire dream was real. Based on those experiences, I tried to draw her portrait, but try as I might, I failed miserably. I could just not access that imagery while awake. > I’m not sure why you think this is unlikely Now you got me doubting that as well :) I think that most of the misunderstanding stems from an unclear definition of what "forming visual images in ones head" means. I guess it means different things to different persons. For me, as referred to in the dream example, I cannot keep a sharp visual image in my head at will. But there is some vague access to certain visual memories and visual planning, so I would not call my self aphantasic. I agree that there is a great variation in how peoples minds work, that's what makes life so very interesting! [1] https://aphantasia.com/discussion/do-you-dream/ https://aphantasia.com/discussion/do-you-dream/
bstnbstn 3y ago
> Does it mean that a person is unable, even with a lot of training, to form any visual images in their heads? Joel Pearson, one of the top researches, speculates it could be possible to “start” the visualisation by training and electrical impulses. Electric impulses on the prefrontal cortex and visual cortex are known to make visual imagination less or more vivid. But how well and whether this works at all, is unknown. Maybe it only works with acquired aphantasia, only for people with weak aphantasia or for people whose aphantasia has a specific cause. (These are my thoughts on this, not Joel Pearson’s).

by smokel 3y ago

lll-o-lll 3y ago

I don’t think many programmers have this issue, I haven’t met another in real life. I certainly don’t think it’s an advantage for software development in general, many of the best developers I’ve worked with over the years have been extremely visual in their thinking (one guy would close his eyes whenever you were describing how something should work so that he could translate to visual, another would only describe things with whiteboard marker in hand, drawing pictures as he went). In fact, I’m very grateful for having been taught by them to design visually early on in my career. I’m mid 40s, and a core part of the value I deliver in my current role is drawing pictures. I realised my brain worked differently when I was about 21 and went to see a psychologist. He asked me to close my eyes and picture my mothers face. I couldn’t do it, and he then asked me to picture some other things and I couldn’t do any of it. There was no name for this condition back then, and both he and I were surprised. I was surprised he was asking me to do things that were obviously impossible, and he was surprised I couldn’t do something that everyone can obviously do. Since then I’ve talked to many people about the “minds eye” and how they perceive things. I’ve never met another like me, but there seems to be a large degree of variance in how detailed or vivid this mental imagery is for individuals. I married very young (25), and my wife is the other extreme. It turned out that she has ASD, and thinks mostly in pictures. She always had auditory processing delay, and part of the reason for that is that words all create images in her head. The delay is partly because there is an automatic translation between words to images going on. She can see images in her head with incredible vividness and detail, and can dial up the detail as needed. She also can’t do algebra to save her life; if she can’t picture it she can’t think about it. We watched a talk from Temple Grandin a few years ago (an autistic PHD), and she described a very similar experience. I really do think there is wide variance in how brains work. The lack of auto-biographical memory is something that seems to be commonly associated with my condition, and this part is clearly mostly downside. I still have semantic memory, so I can remember all the facts about things that have happened. They just don’t have visual or emotional content. But semantic memory needs to be consciously created, by which I mean that I have to be trying to remember as I go if anything is to be committed to long term memory. So most of what has happened in my life is irretrievably lost to me. I’m fortunate that I married young, because my wife remembers everything in vivid detail, and I love to hear the stories about things we’ve done together. Answering some of your questions: > Does it mean that a person is unable, even with a lot of training, to form any visual images in their heads? I have tried the training designed to help with forming mental imagery. This involves doing things like looking at something bright and then closing your eyes so that you have the “after image” and then trying to keep it around. So far I haven’t had any luck, but I do hope that I might still have success one day. I’ve read of other people with my condition being able to learn mental imagery this way, so it must work for some people at least. > This would seem either unlikely, or related to memory problems, such as you describe. I’m not sure why you think this is unlikely, to me this is obviously as normal as can be. As I said before, there is a clear association with the lack of auto-biographical memory based on what I read online. It could be some form of brain-damage I experience, but I don’t think this is the case. I think there is just a huge amount of variation in how peoples minds work!

smokel 3y ago
Thanks again for taking the time to elaborate. I would not have assumed that being able to see an "after image" was related to this -- I had always assumed that that phenomenon was due to sensory overload. There is still a lot to learn :) I read that most people with aphantasia do have visual dreams [1], which I found interesting. In some period of my life I used to have nightmares about my grandmother (who had died many years before), and I remember seeing here face very vividly, as if the entire dream was real. Based on those experiences, I tried to draw her portrait, but try as I might, I failed miserably. I could just not access that imagery while awake. > I’m not sure why you think this is unlikely Now you got me doubting that as well :) I think that most of the misunderstanding stems from an unclear definition of what "forming visual images in ones head" means. I guess it means different things to different persons. For me, as referred to in the dream example, I cannot keep a sharp visual image in my head at will. But there is some vague access to certain visual memories and visual planning, so I would not call my self aphantasic. I agree that there is a great variation in how peoples minds work, that's what makes life so very interesting! [1] https://aphantasia.com/discussion/do-you-dream/ https://aphantasia.com/discussion/do-you-dream/

bstnbstn 3y ago

> Does it mean that a person is unable, even with a lot of training, to form any visual images in their heads? Joel Pearson, one of the top researches, speculates it could be possible to “start” the visualisation by training and electrical impulses. Electric impulses on the prefrontal cortex and visual cortex are known to make visual imagination less or more vivid. But how well and whether this works at all, is unknown. Maybe it only works with acquired aphantasia, only for people with weak aphantasia or for people whose aphantasia has a specific cause. (These are my thoughts on this, not Joel Pearson’s).