Comment by jibbit
21 hours ago
seems ironic (and not at all trustworthy)! if you're right, you can't actually imagine what being able to do it would be like
21 hours ago
seems ironic (and not at all trustworthy)! if you're right, you can't actually imagine what being able to do it would be like
Are you arguing against the GP having it because you can't imagine what that's like? Is that the irony you're talking about?
The people who question this usually turn out to clearly have aphantasia.
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I have achieved visualisation during meditation, once.
I also can visualise while dreaming.
I do not visualise while awake other than that one time.
The difference is extremely stark and very obvious.
I really don't think this is the right definition. I don't think I have aphantasia: I picture things in my mind's eye, can manipulate those images, and I get the various stimulus responses described in some of the literature. But it's totally different than dreaming: it's an act of will, I can dismiss it at any time, and I would never be able to convince myself I was actually 'seeing' what I imagined.
But heck, if that's it then hail, brother.
It's absolutely not a definition - if you can actually picture things, you don't have aphantasia. I brought it up because it's surprisingly frequent that the people who doubt it exists turns out to doubt it because they don't actually believe people actually picture things, and that it's all just talking in metaphors.
It's what I used to think most of my life...
Note that some people who do picture things do visualise it so clearly that it is comparable to seeing, and that was my one singular experience with it as well, but that is the far other end of the scale. Most people will definitely be able to tell it apart from "actually" seeing, but it will be distinctly visual.
When I draw a comparison to dreaming it's about the images, not about being able to will it or dimiss it.