4 ms·
I'll add another data point as I believe I'm on the extreme end of complete aphantasia: Dreaming: Hard to describe without using words that imply too much here
by jdbernard 2y ago
I'll add another data point as I believe I'm on the extreme end of complete aphantasia:
Dreaming: Hard to describe without using words that imply too much here. It's the same as my imagination when reading. Meaning, I am aware of the plot, I can "feel" the place setting, recognize the actors involved, and sometimes even feel/understand the internal motivations of other actors in my dreams. It's hard to describe what I mean by "feeling," but maybe it is similar to how you "feel" your emotions. None of this is visual, even in my dreams. I rarely remember my dreams.
Recalling memories: As the article mentions, I have very weak autobiographical and episodic memories, to the point where my wife and friends are often surprised at how much more clearly they remember the events of my own life. I really do not recall, with any clarity, any events more than 10 years old. At the same time, my memory of "causal facts" is very strong. Meaning I have the ability to remember why things happened basically forever. For example, when taking calculus, I had a very hard time memorizing trigonometric identities, but if I was taught the origin, the "why" I would remember how recreate the identity on the fly for test. Plotlines are similar. I remember the motivation of the characters, the motivating details of the plotline itself, and then subsequent detail is attached to those logical threads of memory. Recall seems very tied to useful purpose. Meaning, I can't just remember something in detail at request. But if I take 15-30 minutes to start working on something, I am flooded with memories regarding that subject. And of course, none of these memories have a visual component. It's all more of an abstract collection of "stuff" that has a real mental substance and mass, for lack of better words, but not imagery.
Recalling visual media: Similar to above. The media is decomposed into chains of cause/effect. Again, hard to describe. I cannot "replay" a movie in any meaningful sense, but if we sit down to watch a movie I've already seen, I will immediately remember basically the entire plotline within a few minutes. I don't really enjoy rewatching movies, or even replaying video games unless there is something novel (watching with someone new/extra content). Reading books is different. I regularly reread books I enjoyed, maybe because there is a much higher amount of content from a logical plotline/story point of view.
Imagination: I "feel" things? Again, mostly centered around arranging lines of causal detail. When I was younger I used to put myself to sleep by making up stories in my head. This is very easy for me, but it's like an audio book (without visualization). This happens, then this happens. Alice says this, and that made Bob believe that, implying feelings. Miscommunication! Etc. Outside of imaginary storytelling I spent most of my time as a kid imagining what I could do/build, and this is the main activity of my adult imagination: imagining things I could make, things I could do with my family, etc.
Maybe another example, I'm not face-blind. I recognize faces, even in my imagination, but I don't "see" them in any literal fashion. For example I can imagine, now, what Viggo M. cast as Aragorn looks like, through the different emotional exclusions of the character, but I "feel" it. I don't see his face visually. I've had the experience of reading a book, watching a movie adaptation, and disliking the casting choice because it didn't match the "picture" in my head. Only there is no literal picture. The actors face "feels" wrong for the character. After seeing the actor I could tell you why their face was wrong for the role, but I could not tell you ahead-of-time what the character "looks like" in my imagination. I tend not to remember details of an author's physical description of their characters. I can't tell you, even now, if Aragorn has blue or brown eyes in the books. I think Viggo M. haa blue eyes, but that's a fact I'm remembering, not a mental image I'm consulting.
Reading: not much to add I haven't touched on already.