this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
12 points (100.0% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1658 readers
7 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Is there some kind of test to see if you have aphantasia?
I admit I sometimes have trouble and need to reread descriptive segments as I can’t picture it.
I think there are other reasons to enjoy fiction too, the plot lines or characters, sometimes just even the dialogue.
I have aphantasia this is a good test.
My aphantasia is total, no visual/audio/taste/emotional sensation in my memory.
As for re-reading books, there are a few, Discworld being #1.
I got...
Hyperphantasia A unique thinking style characterized by an extraordinary ability to visualize, enabling a vivid and immersive inner world.
I can pretty clearly create images in my mind, but I just learned I really suck at doing people. Lake with mountains and trees? Well, what kind of trees? Little ripples in the wind or small waves? Snowy or rocky mountains? Easy as. My sister's face whom I just saw? ... uh... kinda?
My issue with tests like this is I'm asked to describe the image, but I do not know which of the options is correct. I can't say I can see a dim and flat image. I don't really "see" anything, but I kind of "know" the image. How does this compare to the normal experience? I have no way of knowing, so I have trouble putting myself on that scale.
I know it says that you only "know" you are thinking of the object, but it also says no image. I kind of "know" the image, in colour, but can't actually see it. It's so incredibly hard to describe!
When it starts asking about walking around and stuff, no, not even close to that.
My way of explaining this is; I know what an apple looks like but can't see it. I can rotate a block in my head but without an image. It is like there is an image but with a big black sheet in front, if the sheet were moved I'd see the image.
The word "aphantasia" is very recent, and I believe it's not a well studied area. I remember reading on the wikipedia page (though it's no longer there) that for one study they asked participants to visualise something specific and rate out of 10 how vividly they saw it in their mind - 2 or less was considered aphantasia.
On looking around at other sources, it seems some definitions require zero visualisation - if you can sort of vaguely see something then you don't have it. This is me, for the right thing and if I concentrate I can kinda see something.
I don't think there's any test. It's not well studied and doesn't seem to even be well defined.
Yes, I enjoy the plot and plot twists, empathising with characters, and yes clever dialog is always a bonus. But unlike others I know, I can't read a book twice. As soon as I recognise the plot it's just kinda boring to me, I guess because I'm not immersed in the world.
Ah that’s interesting.
I’m with you there, I haven’t re-read a book in years. There are just so many books out there to read, I’d rather look for something new.