I have no ability to create images in a “mind’s eye”. I read of a Neuro-Linguistic Programming technique, which suggested that one try to imagine a very simple image, such as a cloudless sky, the sea (no ships or other coastline) and a beach. So, two lines, the shore and the horizon. I tried this without success.
suggested that one try to imagine a very simple image, such as a cloudless sky, the sea (no ships or other coastline) and a beach. So, two lines, the shore and the horizon. I tried this without success.
Have you ever been to the beach? If so, do you remember what it looked like? If so, you’re done at that point, whether you actually “see” the beach or not.
Imagination is really just a form of memory, and vice versa; some people have difficulty with it simply because they try to create an image from scratch in their mind, having no idea how to go about it and nothing to start from.
In general, when any self-help book tells you to imagine or visualize something, you’re better off asking yourself if you can remember something like that, or asking yourself what something like that would look like. You don’t need to consciously attempt to manipulate imagery—you just ask yourself questions that presuppose you can see something, whether you feel you can “actually” see them or not.
The underlying assumption here is that your brain is absolutely capable of manipulating visual information—otherwise, there are a wide variety of things you simply wouldn’t be able to do. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you can consciously perceive that information, without practice at observing it. In other words, your brain can visualize, but you may not be able to see that visualization without practice.
Another common block to visualization is a conceptual one: the objection that you’re not “really” seeing things because they’re “not real”. (e.g. someone who gets told as a kid that the things they imagine aren’t real and to stop it).
Anyway, not saying that you necessarily can visualize consciously or that any of these issues is yours; just pointing out that there are a lot of reasons why a person can be able to visualize in principle while not being able to perform it in practice.
Practice is actually important, too. As a computer programmer, I have considerable practice doing black-and-white visualization of boxes and lines representing data structures, but less practice at vivid color images or anything panoramic. However, if I look at something and close my eyes, I can retain the full image for a short while, because that’s something I used to practice as a kid, trying to develop a “photographic memory”.
Interesting. My internal experience of programming is quite different; I don’t see boxes and lines. Data structures for me are more like people who answer questions, although of course with no personality or voice; the voice is mine as I ask them a question, and they respond in a “written” form, i.e. with a silent indication. So the diagrams people like to draw for databases and such don’t make direct sense to me per se; they’re just a way of organizing written information.
I am finding it quite difficult to coherently and correctly describe such things; no part of this do I have any certainty of, except that I know I don’t imagine black-and-white box diagrams.
you’re done at that point, whether you actually “see” the beach or not.
The underlying assumption here is that your brain is absolutely capable of manipulating visual information—otherwise, there are a wide variety of things you simply wouldn’t be able to do. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you can consciously perceive that information, without practice at observing it.
Surely the 3x3 letter grid example above shows that conscious perception can be a useful skill.
Also I find this assertion
Another common block to visualization is a conceptual one: the objection that you’re not “really” seeing things because they’re “not real”. (e.g. someone who gets told as a kid that the things they imagine aren’t real and to stop it).
highly implausible; do you have any evidence for it?
Surely the 3x3 letter grid example above shows that conscious perception can be a useful skill.
You don’t have to consciously “see” an image to know what’s in it. Weird, yes, but true. (Or possibly a quirk of subjective language.)
do you have any evidence for it?
Only that I’ve had students who say they “can’t really visualize”, and on further investigating, it turns out that they do see images, but insist that “they’re not really there, even though I can see them”.
This seems to be a separate phenomenon from those who claim that they don’t see pictures, even though they’re really there! (My wife, for example, can physically point out lots of things about these pictures she can’t “see”, and always knows precisely where in space they are, how large, and other things about them, despite “not really seeing” them.)
I have no idea what any of that really means, except that it seems to me that everybody has the ability to process visual images in some way, regardless of whether they describe it as seeing things that aren’t there, not seeing things that are there, or seeing things that are also there!
However, I have not yet encountered someone who only did not see things that were also not there. ;-)
(I have encountered people who claim this, of course, but with a little bit of questioning, it’s relatively easy to show that they can remember colors, spatial relationships, and other things that require some sort of visual processing, even if they don’t consciously “see” anything, or don’t call the experience “seeing”.)
(I have encountered people who claim this, of course, but with a little bit of questioning, it’s relatively easy to show that they can remember colors, spatial relationships, and other things that require some sort of visual processing, even if they don’t consciously “see” anything, or don’t call the experience “seeing”.)
Remembering is not visualizing. I happen to have a very visual memory to the degree that when I do math in my head I do it visually. I visualize the numbers and add them like I did in grade school. If the math is simple enough I can skip the visual process and just “remember” it. Remembering colors, spatial relationships, and other things that required visual processing the first time may not require imaginative processing when recalling the information.
I can remember the layout of a building by thinking about it in my head and “looking” at the floor plan as I “walk” through the “building”. When I toy around with a Rubik’s Cube I “see” the other sides while working on one side. Someone incapable of imagining the Rubik’s Cube or a floor plan would not be able to recall the information in the same way.
I do not see why someone like this could not recall the information about a picture without activating any visual processing.
I do not see why someone like this could not recall the information about a picture without activating any visual processing.
It seems to me you could test this by giving someone IQ-test questions that require visual processing steps. A lot of IQ tests do in fact require such abilities.
Have you ever been to the beach? If so, do you remember what it looked like? If so, you’re done at that point, whether you actually “see” the beach or not.
I think the odds of someone living and having never seen the sky are relatively low, so that may be a better place to start.
I have no ability to create images in a “mind’s eye”. I read of a Neuro-Linguistic Programming technique, which suggested that one try to imagine a very simple image, such as a cloudless sky, the sea (no ships or other coastline) and a beach. So, two lines, the shore and the horizon. I tried this without success.
Have you ever been to the beach? If so, do you remember what it looked like? If so, you’re done at that point, whether you actually “see” the beach or not.
Imagination is really just a form of memory, and vice versa; some people have difficulty with it simply because they try to create an image from scratch in their mind, having no idea how to go about it and nothing to start from.
In general, when any self-help book tells you to imagine or visualize something, you’re better off asking yourself if you can remember something like that, or asking yourself what something like that would look like. You don’t need to consciously attempt to manipulate imagery—you just ask yourself questions that presuppose you can see something, whether you feel you can “actually” see them or not.
The underlying assumption here is that your brain is absolutely capable of manipulating visual information—otherwise, there are a wide variety of things you simply wouldn’t be able to do. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you can consciously perceive that information, without practice at observing it. In other words, your brain can visualize, but you may not be able to see that visualization without practice.
Another common block to visualization is a conceptual one: the objection that you’re not “really” seeing things because they’re “not real”. (e.g. someone who gets told as a kid that the things they imagine aren’t real and to stop it).
Anyway, not saying that you necessarily can visualize consciously or that any of these issues is yours; just pointing out that there are a lot of reasons why a person can be able to visualize in principle while not being able to perform it in practice.
Practice is actually important, too. As a computer programmer, I have considerable practice doing black-and-white visualization of boxes and lines representing data structures, but less practice at vivid color images or anything panoramic. However, if I look at something and close my eyes, I can retain the full image for a short while, because that’s something I used to practice as a kid, trying to develop a “photographic memory”.
Interesting. My internal experience of programming is quite different; I don’t see boxes and lines. Data structures for me are more like people who answer questions, although of course with no personality or voice; the voice is mine as I ask them a question, and they respond in a “written” form, i.e. with a silent indication. So the diagrams people like to draw for databases and such don’t make direct sense to me per se; they’re just a way of organizing written information.
I am finding it quite difficult to coherently and correctly describe such things; no part of this do I have any certainty of, except that I know I don’t imagine black-and-white box diagrams.
Surely the 3x3 letter grid example above shows that conscious perception can be a useful skill.
Also I find this assertion
highly implausible; do you have any evidence for it?
You don’t have to consciously “see” an image to know what’s in it. Weird, yes, but true. (Or possibly a quirk of subjective language.)
Only that I’ve had students who say they “can’t really visualize”, and on further investigating, it turns out that they do see images, but insist that “they’re not really there, even though I can see them”.
This seems to be a separate phenomenon from those who claim that they don’t see pictures, even though they’re really there! (My wife, for example, can physically point out lots of things about these pictures she can’t “see”, and always knows precisely where in space they are, how large, and other things about them, despite “not really seeing” them.)
I have no idea what any of that really means, except that it seems to me that everybody has the ability to process visual images in some way, regardless of whether they describe it as seeing things that aren’t there, not seeing things that are there, or seeing things that are also there!
However, I have not yet encountered someone who only did not see things that were also not there. ;-)
(I have encountered people who claim this, of course, but with a little bit of questioning, it’s relatively easy to show that they can remember colors, spatial relationships, and other things that require some sort of visual processing, even if they don’t consciously “see” anything, or don’t call the experience “seeing”.)
Remembering is not visualizing. I happen to have a very visual memory to the degree that when I do math in my head I do it visually. I visualize the numbers and add them like I did in grade school. If the math is simple enough I can skip the visual process and just “remember” it. Remembering colors, spatial relationships, and other things that required visual processing the first time may not require imaginative processing when recalling the information.
I can remember the layout of a building by thinking about it in my head and “looking” at the floor plan as I “walk” through the “building”. When I toy around with a Rubik’s Cube I “see” the other sides while working on one side. Someone incapable of imagining the Rubik’s Cube or a floor plan would not be able to recall the information in the same way.
I do not see why someone like this could not recall the information about a picture without activating any visual processing.
It seems to me you could test this by giving someone IQ-test questions that require visual processing steps. A lot of IQ tests do in fact require such abilities.
I think the odds of someone living and having never seen the sky are relatively low, so that may be a better place to start.