I’d say that my thinking about mathematics is just as verbal as any other thinking.
Just to clarify, because this will help me categorize information: do you not do the nonverbal kind of thinking at all, or is it all just mixed together?
I’m not really conscious of the distinction, unless you’re talking about outright auditory things like rehearsing a speech in my head. The overwhelming majority of my thinking is in a format where I’m thinking in terms of concepts that I have a word for, but probably not consciously using the word until I start thinking about what I’m thinking about. Do you have a precise definition of “verbal”? But whether you call it verbal or not, it feels like it’s all the same thing.
I don’t really have good definitions at this point, but in my head the distinction between verbal and nonverbal thinking is a matter of order. When I’m thinking nonverbally, my brain addresses the concepts I’m thinking about and the way they relate to each other, then puts them to words. When I’m thinking verbally, my brain comes up with the relevant word first, then pulls up the concept. It’s not binary; I tend to put it on a spectrum, but one that has a definite tipping point. Kinda like a number line: it’s ordered and continuous, but at some point you cross zero and switch from positive to negative. Does that even make sense?
Alright, that works too. We’re allowed to think differently. Now I’m curious, could you define your way of thinking more precisely? I’m not quite sure I grok it.
So, I’d say there are three modes of thinking I can identify:
Normal thinking, what I’m doing the vast majority of the time. I’m thinking by manipulating concepts, which are just, well, things.
Introspective thinking, where I’m doing the first kind of thinking, and thinking about it. Because the map can’t be the territory, when I’m thinking about thinking the concepts I’m thinking about are represented by something simpler than themselves—if you’re thinking about thinking about sheep then the sheep you’re thinking about thinking about can’t be as complex as the sheep you’re thinking about. In fact they’re represented either by words, or by something isomorphic to words—labels for concepts. So when I’m thinking about thinking, the thinking-about-thinking is verbal—but the thinking isn’t (although there’s a light-in-the-fridge effect that might make one think it was).
Auditory thinking, where I’m thinking in words in my head, planning a speech (or more likely a piece of writing—and most of the time I never actually write or say it). This is the only kind of thinking I’m conscious of doing that really feels verbal, but it feels sensory rather than thinking in words; I’m hearing a voice in my cartesian theater.
Just to clarify, because this will help me categorize information: do you not do the nonverbal kind of thinking at all, or is it all just mixed together?
I’m not really conscious of the distinction, unless you’re talking about outright auditory things like rehearsing a speech in my head. The overwhelming majority of my thinking is in a format where I’m thinking in terms of concepts that I have a word for, but probably not consciously using the word until I start thinking about what I’m thinking about. Do you have a precise definition of “verbal”? But whether you call it verbal or not, it feels like it’s all the same thing.
I don’t really have good definitions at this point, but in my head the distinction between verbal and nonverbal thinking is a matter of order. When I’m thinking nonverbally, my brain addresses the concepts I’m thinking about and the way they relate to each other, then puts them to words. When I’m thinking verbally, my brain comes up with the relevant word first, then pulls up the concept. It’s not binary; I tend to put it on a spectrum, but one that has a definite tipping point. Kinda like a number line: it’s ordered and continuous, but at some point you cross zero and switch from positive to negative. Does that even make sense?
It makes sense but it doesn’t match my subjective experience.
Alright, that works too. We’re allowed to think differently. Now I’m curious, could you define your way of thinking more precisely? I’m not quite sure I grok it.
So, I’d say there are three modes of thinking I can identify:
Normal thinking, what I’m doing the vast majority of the time. I’m thinking by manipulating concepts, which are just, well, things.
Introspective thinking, where I’m doing the first kind of thinking, and thinking about it. Because the map can’t be the territory, when I’m thinking about thinking the concepts I’m thinking about are represented by something simpler than themselves—if you’re thinking about thinking about sheep then the sheep you’re thinking about thinking about can’t be as complex as the sheep you’re thinking about. In fact they’re represented either by words, or by something isomorphic to words—labels for concepts. So when I’m thinking about thinking, the thinking-about-thinking is verbal—but the thinking isn’t (although there’s a light-in-the-fridge effect that might make one think it was).
Auditory thinking, where I’m thinking in words in my head, planning a speech (or more likely a piece of writing—and most of the time I never actually write or say it). This is the only kind of thinking I’m conscious of doing that really feels verbal, but it feels sensory rather than thinking in words; I’m hearing a voice in my cartesian theater.