4 ms·
There are many that would strongly object to this conclusion. I have heard friends describe their inner life as almost entirely verbal, that they "think in word
by boerseth 2y ago
There are many that would strongly object to this conclusion. I have heard friends describe their inner life as almost entirely verbal, that they "think in words", and are totally unable to relate to anything else.
When we say "communication", I think there is an implication that the goal is communication with others. But there is also value in communication with oneself. To verbalize is to condense ones thoughts into words, and when we hear words they get unpacked and evoke meaning. The resulting feedback loop can be amazing for refining ideas.
It should be no surprise that humans might end up relying on this internal monologue when thinking to the point that they mistake it for thought itself.
- teeray 2y agoI surprised my freshman-year Spanish teacher on the last day of classes when he did an AMA. I asked "do you think in Spanish"? This question was nonsense to him—another student got it, but he was baffled by what I was asking. It wasn't until years later when I found out that some people didn't have an internal monologue that his confusion made sense.
- poincaredisk 2y agoAre there really people with no internal voice at all? I understand that not everyone has this constant internal chat as I do, but it's hard to me to imagine, for example, solving math problems without "thinking" the numbers aloud.
- BitwiseFool 2y agoI have an internal monologue and I struggle to imagine how someone can think without one. Yet I also wonder if bypassing the need to articulate thoughts in words is actually more efficient. Do those people have a higher thought throughput? I suspect we may never know.
- ogig 2y agoI think in words. There is always an internal dialogue. Even when doing music, or painting, I'm always anticipating what's next by some words; here comes the bridge, goes to Am now, gonna paint leaves in this shape, or maybe this other. I can visualize things and sounds, but words are always involved. That's probably why I'm not very talented at music or painting.
- notTooFarGone 2y agoThe thing is: I'm fairly confident my subconsciousness is the actual thinking part and my consciousness is kinda dumb if that makes sense. The part of my brain that does think in words is pretty slow and gets a lot of information from the "processor" behind without actually realizing it. I visualize it as the 2 man start up where there one tech guy and one who sells it outwards. I'm not sure where the science is in that...
- Malic 2y agoCGP Grey had a video essay that might resonate with you “You Are Two”: https://youtu.be/wfYbgdo8e-8 https://youtu.be/wfYbgdo8e-8
- mwmisner 2y agoSeems like you kinda described this book! (Really interesting book!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow
- noiv 2y agoI've abandoned the idea of all humans use language the same way a long time ago. However I hope everybody does not use language as a tool to drive a car and looking at the work of Srinivasa Ramanujan I'm pretty sure no language was involved before it sparked. "Language is a virus", Laurie Anderson ♫