5 ms·

Does it follow that people with aphantasia (edit: "aphantasics", per the article) would be unable to draw a realistic-looking apple from scratch? If not, then h

Does it follow that people with aphantasia (edit: "aphantasics", per the article) would be unable to draw a realistic-looking apple from scratch? If not, then how do scientists show someone has aphantasia? Is it falsifiable?

t-3 3y ago
Not at all - you can still see the paper and know what an apple is supposed to look like. Describing a face or drawing a scene from memory is very hard though.
- dataflow 3y ago
  That doesn't really make sense to me. What does it mean to "know what an apple looks like" without being unable to imagine it? How would that be any different from knowing what a face looks like without being able to imagine it? Do note I said realistic apple [1], not just a cartoonish drawing, so I don't just mean "a squished circle"... [1] Example: https://drawpj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/hyperrealistic-apple.jpg https://drawpj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/hyperrealistic...
  - t-3 3y ago
    Why would I have to visualize to know whether or not something is an apple? I can recognize one on sight without having to match it up with a visualization in my head, so I can start from the right shape and add details until it becomes an apple. No visualization required at all. Obviously it's quicker and easier to use a model or reference picture, but not required.
    - dataflow 3y ago
      I guess I don't see how that's be different from drawing a face? Start with the right shape an add details until it becomes a face?
      - t-3 3y ago
        I can draw a generic face, but not a specific one unless I have a model or picture. If I had to give a description of someone, even family members or close friends, I would be hopeless other than very basic things like relative height, hair and skin color.
        dataflow 3y ago
        That's so fascinating, thanks. Does aphantasia give you any trouble in your daily life? Or does it end up being a non-issue?
        t-3 3y ago
        It's a non-issue. I never even realized that it was a thing until I several years ago I was listening to a podcast that involved discussing mental monologues and imagery and thinking "WTF are these people talking about?!", and then doing some research. I had previously always understood things like "mind's eye" and inner voice/conscience as metaphors or some kind of mystical superstition.
        kbrkbr 3y ago
        Same here. I never realized until I read an article about it well in my fourties. I read the late Wittgenstein when I was twenty, and I also thought that thing with "the meaning of a dog is a mental image of a dog" was a metaphor. He quotes this somewhere to criticize it iirc.
        solumunus 3y ago
        > I was listening to a podcast that involved discussing mental monologues and imagery and thinking "WTF are these people talking about?!" But you claim to not have an inner voice? Boys, I think we've got one.
        t-3 3y ago
        I don't think in words unless I'm reading or writing and "thinking "WTF are these people talking about?!"" is just a metaphor for incredulity (how else am I supposed to that feeling across the internet, through text?). I especially don't have an independent, always-on commentator talking to me in my head all the time, which is what I gather "inner monologue" is.
warp 3y ago
Prof Joel Pearson has developed three distinct objective tests to measure aphantasia. Here is a talk about it: https://youtu.be/tA_4HNaKsS0 https://youtu.be/tA_4HNaKsS0
- dataflow 3y ago
  Interesting, thanks. I'll have to watch it when I find the chance.
Filligree 3y ago
In addition to the other replies: No, aphantastics (nice word!) aren't unable to do it, much like almost anyone can become amateur-level competent at almost anything if they put in enough effort. But it's a matter of talent, and you're missing a big component. That can be made up for in other ways, though I think it'd be hard to reach the peak.

t-3 3y ago

Not at all - you can still see the paper and know what an apple is supposed to look like. Describing a face or drawing a scene from memory is very hard though.

dataflow 3y ago
That doesn't really make sense to me. What does it mean to "know what an apple looks like" without being unable to imagine it? How would that be any different from knowing what a face looks like without being able to imagine it? Do note I said realistic apple [1], not just a cartoonish drawing, so I don't just mean "a squished circle"... [1] Example: https://drawpj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/hyperrealistic-apple.jpg https://drawpj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/hyperrealistic...
- t-3 3y ago
  Why would I have to visualize to know whether or not something is an apple? I can recognize one on sight without having to match it up with a visualization in my head, so I can start from the right shape and add details until it becomes an apple. No visualization required at all. Obviously it's quicker and easier to use a model or reference picture, but not required.
  - dataflow 3y ago
    I guess I don't see how that's be different from drawing a face? Start with the right shape an add details until it becomes a face?
    - t-3 3y ago
      I can draw a generic face, but not a specific one unless I have a model or picture. If I had to give a description of someone, even family members or close friends, I would be hopeless other than very basic things like relative height, hair and skin color.
      - dataflow 3y ago
        That's so fascinating, thanks. Does aphantasia give you any trouble in your daily life? Or does it end up being a non-issue?
        t-3 3y ago
        It's a non-issue. I never even realized that it was a thing until I several years ago I was listening to a podcast that involved discussing mental monologues and imagery and thinking "WTF are these people talking about?!", and then doing some research. I had previously always understood things like "mind's eye" and inner voice/conscience as metaphors or some kind of mystical superstition.
        kbrkbr 3y ago
        Same here. I never realized until I read an article about it well in my fourties. I read the late Wittgenstein when I was twenty, and I also thought that thing with "the meaning of a dog is a mental image of a dog" was a metaphor. He quotes this somewhere to criticize it iirc.
        solumunus 3y ago
        > I was listening to a podcast that involved discussing mental monologues and imagery and thinking "WTF are these people talking about?!" But you claim to not have an inner voice? Boys, I think we've got one.
        t-3 3y ago
        I don't think in words unless I'm reading or writing and "thinking "WTF are these people talking about?!"" is just a metaphor for incredulity (how else am I supposed to that feeling across the internet, through text?). I especially don't have an independent, always-on commentator talking to me in my head all the time, which is what I gather "inner monologue" is.

warp 3y ago

Prof Joel Pearson has developed three distinct objective tests to measure aphantasia. Here is a talk about it: https://youtu.be/tA_4HNaKsS0 https://youtu.be/tA_4HNaKsS0

dataflow 3y ago
Interesting, thanks. I'll have to watch it when I find the chance.

Filligree 3y ago

In addition to the other replies: No, aphantastics (nice word!) aren't unable to do it, much like almost anyone can become amateur-level competent at almost anything if they put in enough effort. But it's a matter of talent, and you're missing a big component. That can be made up for in other ways, though I think it'd be hard to reach the peak.