zlacker

[parent] [thread] 9 comments
1. neom+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-10-19 18:19:32
How would someone think in words? You mean the words in the pictures or...?
replies(2): >>mjochi+k1 >>vivekd+02
2. mjochi+k1[view] [source] 2024-10-19 18:31:00
>>neom+(OP)
By "hearing" words, sentences, dialogues in their mind. Just like imagining a picture, but audio instead.
replies(1): >>Teever+W2
3. vivekd+02[view] [source] 2024-10-19 18:36:08
>>neom+(OP)
I think in words. For me during thought there is a literal voice in my putting my thoughts into words.
replies(5): >>BarryM+S3 >>jerf+U3 >>binary+48 >>neom+yx >>perryi+bJ
◧◩
4. Teever+W2[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-19 18:45:13
>>mjochi+k1
but words, sentences, and dialogues are all features of language.
◧◩
5. BarryM+S3[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-19 18:52:47
>>vivekd+02
Are there really people who don't know about inner monologues?
replies(1): >>IAmGra+CB1
◧◩
6. jerf+U3[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-19 18:52:56
>>vivekd+02
I have the standard internal monologue many people report, but I've never put much stock in the "words are necessary for thought" because while I think a lot in words, I also do a lot of thinking in not-words.

We recently put the project I've been working on for the last year out into the field for the first time. As was fully expected, some bugs emerged. I needed to solve one of them. I designed a system in my head for spawning off child processes based on the parent process to do certain distinct types of work in a way that gives us access to OS process-level controls over the work, and then got about halfway through implementing it. Little to none of this design involved "words". I can't even say it involved much "visualization" either, except maybe in a very loose sense. It's hard to describe in words how I didn't use words but I've been programming for long enough that I pretty much just directly work in system-architecture space for such designs, especially relatively small ones like that that are just a couple day's work.

Things like pattern language advocates aren't wrong that it can still be useful to put such things into words, especially for communication purposes, but I know through direct personal experience that words are not a necessary component of even quite complicated thought.

"Subjective experience reports are always tricky, jerf. How do you know that you aren't fooling yourself about not using words?" A good and reasonable question, to which my answer is, I don't even have words for the sort of design I was doing. Some, from the aforementioned pattern languages, yes, but not in general. So I don't think I was just fooling myself on the grounds that even if I tried to serialize what I did directly into English, a transliteration rather than a translation, I don't think I could. I don't have one.

I'm also not claiming to be special. I don't know the percentages but I'm sure many people do this too.

◧◩
7. binary+48[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-19 19:25:14
>>vivekd+02
Like, at the speed of speech?
◧◩
8. neom+yx[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-19 23:25:44
>>vivekd+02
I'm an idiot. I thought this meant, for some reason unknown to me... written words, something I couldn't imagine being able to think in. Spoken words, sure.
◧◩
9. perryi+bJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-20 02:02:57
>>vivekd+02
So if you want to look at your phone there's a voice going "I shall pick up my phone and swipe the lock away now."? Trying to understand if ALL thinking is in words or some subset.
◧◩◪
10. IAmGra+CB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-10-20 14:50:11
>>BarryM+S3
I think it's more likely that they lack the awareness to recognize it.
[go to top]