←back to thread

183 points petalmind | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
sharkjacobs ◴[] No.45763206[source]
> He knew, of course, that people talked about “picturing” or “visualizing,” but he had always taken this to be just a metaphorical way of saying “thinking.” Now it appeared that, in some incomprehensible sense, people meant these words literally.

This is the quintessential aphantasic experience. I still struggle to believe that other people "see" things in their heads.

replies(6): >>45763266 #>>45763329 #>>45763380 #>>45763403 #>>45763475 #>>45763546 #
ivape ◴[] No.45763380[source]
So, if you watch a poor person begging for food on the street, how do you process that in the future? Do you rely on the remembered feeling and literal observation in words? How do you not remember what you saw?
replies(4): >>45763664 #>>45763686 #>>45766717 #>>45766770 #
1. lll-o-lll ◴[] No.45766770[source]
Adding a data point. I don’t think this is aphantasia, but rather SDAM (severely deficient autobiographical memory). For the future, the memory has to be recorded as facts as the original experience is gone. This means the emotions and other aspects cannot be experienced again. Recording things like, I saw this, I felt like this, I intend to do this.

Not all people who can’t visualise have this SDAM thing (though it is a common overlap), but SDAM means I would remember an event like this less than a problem at work (as an example), without intentional effort to transcribe it.

This sounds a bit cold, but it’s not as cold as it looks. If I read your description of the poor person begging for food, I am emotionally moved. In a similar way, if I examine my memory of the poor person begging for food, I am emotionally moved. I might not be reliving the experience, but the narrative I’ve preserved is enough.

This is why I like listening to my wife describe things we’ve done together. I often don’t remember it, but the narrative is still emotionally impacting. She’s my external memory for things that have happened in our lives.

replies(1): >>45767689 #
2. ◴[] No.45767689[source]