Ide love to see what you can see when you read or listen to a book. It would take so much less energy to read as much as i do. It must be like watching a movie playout inside your head with the best narrator i could imagine
Short answer is, you can’t. That’s why I don’t read books.
Longer answer is that even if you read a book you can still understand what of happening in the book, you simply won’t get a visual image of what you read. Makes books pretty boring to read IMO.
No, you don’t have to, especially if you’ve never known any different. It’s like the difference between a sketch and a photo. If the artist’s any good they can capture the essence of something with a few lines.
I feel like I’m between 4 and 5 if I try to imagine something on purpose but if I’m reading a book or someone is describing something to me I’m a solid 1 as I can vividly see what it’s being described.
I don’t know if I’m a 1 or 5. I can’t tell the difference between picturing a fully realistic image of an apple and imagining what my brain tells me is a fully realistic image of an apple and I can’t conceive of how one could tell the difference.
Damn I’ve read about aphantasia before but never seen it depicted in a graph with levels… turns out I’m around a 4… thats weird.
Here is a slightly different (but better resolution) image:
That’s pretty interesting. I never gave it much thought, but apparently I’m between a 2 & 3 at the moment
I’m solidly a 1 and I can’t fathom anything else. I’d love to read studies about this.
Ide love to see what you can see when you read or listen to a book. It would take so much less energy to read as much as i do. It must be like watching a movie playout inside your head with the best narrator i could imagine
I’m a 1 on that chart and I struggle to understand how you can even follow what’s happening in a book without being able to imagine it.
I mean, you have to be able to fill in the gaps don’t you? Books can’t describe every detail.
Short answer is, you can’t. That’s why I don’t read books.
Longer answer is that even if you read a book you can still understand what of happening in the book, you simply won’t get a visual image of what you read. Makes books pretty boring to read IMO.
Linked concepts and context.
No, you don’t have to, especially if you’ve never known any different. It’s like the difference between a sketch and a photo. If the artist’s any good they can capture the essence of something with a few lines.
You’re spot on. I genuinely tend to forget if I’ve read a book or watched a movie/series if it’s been a few years.
I feel like I’m between 4 and 5 if I try to imagine something on purpose but if I’m reading a book or someone is describing something to me I’m a solid 1 as I can vividly see what it’s being described.
I don’t know if I’m a 1 or 5. I can’t tell the difference between picturing a fully realistic image of an apple and imagining what my brain tells me is a fully realistic image of an apple and I can’t conceive of how one could tell the difference.
ya I’d say I’m between 3 and 4 it’s there but definitely not clearly more of a vague understanding