It’s assuming that there’s some sense to the idea of exploring a mental image. You can’t put people on a scale of their ability to explore mental imagery without also assuming that it makes sense to talk about exploring mental imagery. That’s a huge assumption to make.
You take 10 people, and ask them each in turn : “Imagine a tiger. Can you tell me how many stripes it has?”
Five people tell you a number right away
Five people scratch their head and say “I’m not imagining a specific number of stripes, what do you mean?”
… then you have a good clue as to which of these people have strong mental imagery. That’s useful, non-trivial information. I’m not sure which part you object to, and we seem to be talking past each other.
Turns out the number of stripes is not even well defined. Let alone can be told right away in an instant. Obviously one coming up with tiger example doesn’t have good enough mental imagery to see the flaw without looking at a photo of a tiger.
It’s assuming that there’s some sense to the idea of exploring a mental image. You can’t put people on a scale of their ability to explore mental imagery without also assuming that it makes sense to talk about exploring mental imagery. That’s a huge assumption to make.
You take 10 people, and ask them each in turn : “Imagine a tiger. Can you tell me how many stripes it has?”
Five people tell you a number right away
Five people scratch their head and say “I’m not imagining a specific number of stripes, what do you mean?”
… then you have a good clue as to which of these people have strong mental imagery. That’s useful, non-trivial information. I’m not sure which part you object to, and we seem to be talking past each other.
There’s a picture of tiger: http://www.solarnavigator.net/animal_kingdom/animal_images/Tiger_panthera_tigris_tigris_Bengal.jpg How many stripes it has?
Turns out the number of stripes is not even well defined. Let alone can be told right away in an instant. Obviously one coming up with tiger example doesn’t have good enough mental imagery to see the flaw without looking at a photo of a tiger.