5 ms·

> This kind of feat, according to animal behavior researchers, requires the ability to form “mental templates.” Essentially, a mental template is an image in th

> This kind of feat, according to animal behavior researchers, requires the ability to form “mental templates.” Essentially, a mental template is an image in the mind of what a particular object looks like, even when that object is not present. As someone with aphantasia, can I get points for recreating something I've seen _without_ having an "image in the mind"?

Retr0id 2y ago
I'm curious, could you describe your mental process of recreating a shape you've seen before? (via drawing, I suppose) I would of course start by visualising it in my head, but I know that's not how aphantasia works.
- sfink 2y ago
  As another someone with aphantasia, I remember what something looks like, so I draw what I remember. That memory is not an image, it's knowledge of what something looks like. For simple things, that's enough. For complicated things, I sketch out what I remember of the overall appearance, look at it and gauge how far off it is and what is off, and add in details to gradually reduce the difference. I'm not a very good artist, so it'll always look kind of bad, though oddly it doesn't feel like aphantasia is all that much of an obstacle to my ability to draw. It's more just skill in making things look "right", skill that is learnable and seems like is necessary to learn by anyone, include those without aphantasia. It's difficult to communicate to someone without aphantasia, because to them apparently the memory of what something looks like is an image. It's similar to the question about whether I dream in color. I mean, I dream in color just as much as I read in color. If asked, I could tell you what color something is. It's part of my knowledge of what that thing looks like. But knowing what color something is and seeing the thing in color are definitely not the same. I don't dream in images at all. I certainly don't dream in "black and white". Colors and grayscales only have meaning in an image. (And maybe it's just me, but if the color of something never strikes me as an important characteristic, I will have no memory of what color the thing is. Right now, I couldn't tell you what color the walls of the next room over are, despite seeing it every day. Even though I could probably roughly model the entire room and get the dimensions and positions of everything about right.) Though I'm skeptical that "normal" people are as restricted to images as their descriptions often imply. Not everything is 2D, so memories are going to have to include at least some shape information. And I'm sure you have all kinds of associations of the texture and feel of things you visualize, and if it's prickly how much it would hurt to bump into it or hold it in your hand. Memories are rich multi-sensory things, and they aren't just limited to point-in-time sensations either.
  - bigyikes 2y ago
    Interestingly, your description of remembering what something looks like matches my experience exactly, but in my dreams I see vividly. Aphantasic except in my dreams?
    - Yossarrian22 2y ago
      Are you ever able to control your dreams? And if you are do you lose “video” on them but still retain perception on what is happening? That’s how I and other aphantasics I know experience it
  - tbrownaw 2y ago
    > is not an image, it's knowledge of what something looks like Is this similar to calling an .svg "not an image" if it's viewed in a text editor rather than on a canvas?
    - trescenzi 2y ago
      I don’t know if it’s true for others with aphantasia but this seems like solid description to me. I draw a square by knowing that squares are closed objects with four equal length sides that meet at 90 degree angles. I don’t think that explicitly every time, but regardless there's no visual stimuli.
    - hiracat 2y ago
      That's an amazing description, I don't have aphantasia, but that made me understand what it could be like.
    - sfink 2y ago
      Somewhat? But I think it might lead you slightly astray. With SVG text, there's an interpretation step to get to the image. If you ask a question about the image represented by the SVG, you'd probably do SVG --> image --> result. With my memory of what something looks like, I don't really process it into an intermediate image form, even if I'm drawing something out. For the above example, it's more like memory --> result. More similar to a regular person's image --> result than something like memory --> visual representation --> result. In all cases, some sort of processing happens on the --> lines. My knowledge of what a square looks like includes the right angles at the corners, the equal length of the sides, the alignment with one side at the bottom (not part of the mathematical definition, note), some sense I can't describe of the overall shape, the closed shape, the straight sides, etc. Some of it corresponds directly to mathematical notions, some of it is the feel, some of it is associations with how they work in practice or where they've shown up. When drawing it, I rely mostly on the straight sides, the 90° angles, and the closed shape. I'm not logically figuring out what those together imply, I just start with drawing a straight line segment and then close it off with 3 more segments at right angles to each other, and confirm that it looks right at the end. If you ask me what part would be most painful to bump into, I do something very close to visualizing the pointy corners, but I don't picture them so much as retrieve my association with their sharpness. Dunno if this makes sense or how generalizable this is to other people, I'm just kind of laying out my stream of consciousness impressions of my brain's workings.
Terretta 2y ago
As another, I thought "mental template" is the perfect term, since it's neither image nor visual. I assume (since you mention points), you can recreate a geometric drawing (say, a floor plan, or a bicycle*)? What would you call that if not drawing from a mental template? * It seems, at least with bicycles, some people who do this "visually" are terrible at it: https://www.wired.com/2016/04/can-draw-bikes-memory-definitely-cant/ https://www.wired.com/2016/04/can-draw-bikes-memory-definite... ... I look at those, and think, how T.F. do they think that would work? Then I realize they aren't thinking how it works to draw it, they are drawing what they see and they don't look at things closely enough to understand their shape.
- jumploops 2y ago
  I actually quite like the term “mental template” but then they immediately equated it to an image. The best way I can describe my aphantasia is that I think about objects three dimensionally. There’s nothing visual about it, but I can think about the relation of “points” (really surfaces) in terms of the whole.
  - Terretta 2y ago
    Yes. I think this is one that is non-euphemistically "differently abled". Given a choice, I would trade the postcard recall ability for the ability to multi-dimensionally map concepts and then "see" the gaps, as if a periodic table missing some elements, so you know what key areas need working on even though (because) they aren't in evidence.

Retr0id 2y ago

I'm curious, could you describe your mental process of recreating a shape you've seen before? (via drawing, I suppose) I would of course start by visualising it in my head, but I know that's not how aphantasia works.

sfink 2y ago
As another someone with aphantasia, I remember what something looks like, so I draw what I remember. That memory is not an image, it's knowledge of what something looks like. For simple things, that's enough. For complicated things, I sketch out what I remember of the overall appearance, look at it and gauge how far off it is and what is off, and add in details to gradually reduce the difference. I'm not a very good artist, so it'll always look kind of bad, though oddly it doesn't feel like aphantasia is all that much of an obstacle to my ability to draw. It's more just skill in making things look "right", skill that is learnable and seems like is necessary to learn by anyone, include those without aphantasia. It's difficult to communicate to someone without aphantasia, because to them apparently the memory of what something looks like is an image. It's similar to the question about whether I dream in color. I mean, I dream in color just as much as I read in color. If asked, I could tell you what color something is. It's part of my knowledge of what that thing looks like. But knowing what color something is and seeing the thing in color are definitely not the same. I don't dream in images at all. I certainly don't dream in "black and white". Colors and grayscales only have meaning in an image. (And maybe it's just me, but if the color of something never strikes me as an important characteristic, I will have no memory of what color the thing is. Right now, I couldn't tell you what color the walls of the next room over are, despite seeing it every day. Even though I could probably roughly model the entire room and get the dimensions and positions of everything about right.) Though I'm skeptical that "normal" people are as restricted to images as their descriptions often imply. Not everything is 2D, so memories are going to have to include at least some shape information. And I'm sure you have all kinds of associations of the texture and feel of things you visualize, and if it's prickly how much it would hurt to bump into it or hold it in your hand. Memories are rich multi-sensory things, and they aren't just limited to point-in-time sensations either.
- bigyikes 2y ago
  Interestingly, your description of remembering what something looks like matches my experience exactly, but in my dreams I see vividly. Aphantasic except in my dreams?
  - Yossarrian22 2y ago
    Are you ever able to control your dreams? And if you are do you lose “video” on them but still retain perception on what is happening? That’s how I and other aphantasics I know experience it
- tbrownaw 2y ago
  > is not an image, it's knowledge of what something looks like Is this similar to calling an .svg "not an image" if it's viewed in a text editor rather than on a canvas?
  - trescenzi 2y ago
    I don’t know if it’s true for others with aphantasia but this seems like solid description to me. I draw a square by knowing that squares are closed objects with four equal length sides that meet at 90 degree angles. I don’t think that explicitly every time, but regardless there's no visual stimuli.
  - hiracat 2y ago
    That's an amazing description, I don't have aphantasia, but that made me understand what it could be like.
  - sfink 2y ago
    Somewhat? But I think it might lead you slightly astray. With SVG text, there's an interpretation step to get to the image. If you ask a question about the image represented by the SVG, you'd probably do SVG --> image --> result. With my memory of what something looks like, I don't really process it into an intermediate image form, even if I'm drawing something out. For the above example, it's more like memory --> result. More similar to a regular person's image --> result than something like memory --> visual representation --> result. In all cases, some sort of processing happens on the --> lines. My knowledge of what a square looks like includes the right angles at the corners, the equal length of the sides, the alignment with one side at the bottom (not part of the mathematical definition, note), some sense I can't describe of the overall shape, the closed shape, the straight sides, etc. Some of it corresponds directly to mathematical notions, some of it is the feel, some of it is associations with how they work in practice or where they've shown up. When drawing it, I rely mostly on the straight sides, the 90° angles, and the closed shape. I'm not logically figuring out what those together imply, I just start with drawing a straight line segment and then close it off with 3 more segments at right angles to each other, and confirm that it looks right at the end. If you ask me what part would be most painful to bump into, I do something very close to visualizing the pointy corners, but I don't picture them so much as retrieve my association with their sharpness. Dunno if this makes sense or how generalizable this is to other people, I'm just kind of laying out my stream of consciousness impressions of my brain's workings.

Terretta 2y ago

As another, I thought "mental template" is the perfect term, since it's neither image nor visual. I assume (since you mention points), you can recreate a geometric drawing (say, a floor plan, or a bicycle*)? What would you call that if not drawing from a mental template? * It seems, at least with bicycles, some people who do this "visually" are terrible at it: https://www.wired.com/2016/04/can-draw-bikes-memory-definitely-cant/ https://www.wired.com/2016/04/can-draw-bikes-memory-definite... ... I look at those, and think, how T.F. do they think that would work? Then I realize they aren't thinking how it works to draw it, they are drawing what they see and they don't look at things closely enough to understand their shape.

jumploops 2y ago
I actually quite like the term “mental template” but then they immediately equated it to an image. The best way I can describe my aphantasia is that I think about objects three dimensionally. There’s nothing visual about it, but I can think about the relation of “points” (really surfaces) in terms of the whole.
- Terretta 2y ago
  Yes. I think this is one that is non-euphemistically "differently abled". Given a choice, I would trade the postcard recall ability for the ability to multi-dimensionally map concepts and then "see" the gaps, as if a periodic table missing some elements, so you know what key areas need working on even though (because) they aren't in evidence.