I used to have the same question. What finally convinced me was imagining an apple sitting on a table. When I try to imagine specific parts (e.g. the stem, or the specular shine on its skin, or water beads on its side) I can actually see that part of the apple in my head, and the images change when I change the color, form etc.
See, if I imagine an apple there’s no images. There’s just… the concept of an apple, I suppose.
I know what an image of it would look like. I know what light shining on it (photorealistic, phong, gouraud, take your pick), or water beads on its side would look like. I could draw it for you, if I didn’t suck at drawing. Make a decent vector image of it, sure, with the right software.
But I don’t see it. I’d need eyes for that, and my eyes point towards the outside of my brain, not the inside.
Yeah, my imagination area does not overlap with my visual field. My imagination area is fully-featured, but not normally interestingly-populated until I decide to (day)dream or will myself to do visualization exercises.
Not see it, no. I could describe it, from memory, if I had looked at it for long enough and paid enough attention (especially if I knew beforehand I’d have to describe it), but obviously I wouldn’t be seeing it. There’d be no image, just a memory.
I’m pretty certain the visual processing parts of the brain are not involved when I imagine or remember stuff.
I mean, there’s a lot of image processing going on in the retina and optic nerve (edge detection, contrast highlighting, and whatnot) that’s obviously not available when not using the eyes (which makes it very hard for me to imagine how this seeing images in your brain thing works), then a lot of spatial and temporal signal processing (motion detection, noise reduction, speed classification, and so on) in the thalamus, then there’s several layers of visual cortex doing the rest of the image processing, pattern recognition, and whatnot, and then there’s the rest of the brain (mainly prefrontal cortex and parietal and temporal lobes), which actually deals with that information, stores it, recalls it, and whatnot.
I imagine the whole retina-thalamus-visual cortex bit isn’t significantly involved in the way I “visualise” stuff, while it might be more involved for people who “see images” in their brains.
All the processed stuff (concepts, descriptions, dimensions, spatial and temporal relationships, and whatnot) is still there, though, just not the raw visual data (which would be superfluous in most cases anyway, unless I was trying to do something like recall a written page I hadn’t read in order to read it later, which I can’t do but you or someone with photographic memory might), so I’ve got everything I need anyway.
Damn, that’s wild. Kinda cool, though, that a remembered description is enough to be able to recognize things.
I can read a page I never read before, but there are times where the visual memory help fill in the gaps. When I read music and play it later I’ll do that, where I essentially read the music again, though I find that can actually be a little slow and limiting at times but it has its uses.
yeah I’ve tried the apple thing a few times a year for the past few years, and not once have I felt like I was seeing it. I just think of the outline of an apple, maybe how the light would reflect off it, and of a colour. all separate
I could describe to you the Granny Smith variety (the only one I like), or maybe the Golden or Gala (the other varieties common in supermarkets around here), but not particular apples, unless I had actually tried to memorize their details (which would look like a list, not an image).
Maybe I don’t care enough about apples.
I could describe my old pets (I did care enough about them to remember them), but, again, that’d look more like a list.
why did that convince you? if i imagine an apple on a table i am unable to tell i “see” it or if i “know” it based on all the properties i know it should have. like, is it a mental image or a description mapped into some sort of imagined space?
For me it’s a mental image, which is definitely distinct from a collection of descriptions. I don’t really know how to describe it, but it feels like my head uses circuitry close to other visual circuitry while I’m focusing on this kind of mental image. Almost like the mental image is “injected” into hardware/software used for other visual processing.
I used to have the same question. What finally convinced me was imagining an apple sitting on a table. When I try to imagine specific parts (e.g. the stem, or the specular shine on its skin, or water beads on its side) I can actually see that part of the apple in my head, and the images change when I change the color, form etc.
See, if I imagine an apple there’s no images. There’s just… the concept of an apple, I suppose.
I know what an image of it would look like. I know what light shining on it (photorealistic, phong, gouraud, take your pick), or water beads on its side would look like. I could draw it for you, if I didn’t suck at drawing. Make a decent vector image of it, sure, with the right software.
But I don’t see it. I’d need eyes for that, and my eyes point towards the outside of my brain, not the inside.
Yeah, my imagination area does not overlap with my visual field. My imagination area is fully-featured, but not normally interestingly-populated until I decide to (day)dream or will myself to do visualization exercises.
Out of curiousity, if I put an apple infront of you for you to look at and then had you close your eyes, could you see that apple?
Not see it, no. I could describe it, from memory, if I had looked at it for long enough and paid enough attention (especially if I knew beforehand I’d have to describe it), but obviously I wouldn’t be seeing it. There’d be no image, just a memory.
I’m pretty certain the visual processing parts of the brain are not involved when I imagine or remember stuff.
I mean, there’s a lot of image processing going on in the retina and optic nerve (edge detection, contrast highlighting, and whatnot) that’s obviously not available when not using the eyes (which makes it very hard for me to imagine how this seeing images in your brain thing works), then a lot of spatial and temporal signal processing (motion detection, noise reduction, speed classification, and so on) in the thalamus, then there’s several layers of visual cortex doing the rest of the image processing, pattern recognition, and whatnot, and then there’s the rest of the brain (mainly prefrontal cortex and parietal and temporal lobes), which actually deals with that information, stores it, recalls it, and whatnot.
I imagine the whole retina-thalamus-visual cortex bit isn’t significantly involved in the way I “visualise” stuff, while it might be more involved for people who “see images” in their brains.
All the processed stuff (concepts, descriptions, dimensions, spatial and temporal relationships, and whatnot) is still there, though, just not the raw visual data (which would be superfluous in most cases anyway, unless I was trying to do something like recall a written page I hadn’t read in order to read it later, which I can’t do but you or someone with photographic memory might), so I’ve got everything I need anyway.
Damn, that’s wild. Kinda cool, though, that a remembered description is enough to be able to recognize things.
I can read a page I never read before, but there are times where the visual memory help fill in the gaps. When I read music and play it later I’ll do that, where I essentially read the music again, though I find that can actually be a little slow and limiting at times but it has its uses.
yeah I’ve tried the apple thing a few times a year for the past few years, and not once have I felt like I was seeing it. I just think of the outline of an apple, maybe how the light would reflect off it, and of a colour. all separate
I just imagine past apples I have seen, and it’s really hard to hold onto one specific apple.
I couldn’t possibly remember specific apples.
I could describe to you the Granny Smith variety (the only one I like), or maybe the Golden or Gala (the other varieties common in supermarkets around here), but not particular apples, unless I had actually tried to memorize their details (which would look like a list, not an image).
Maybe I don’t care enough about apples.
I could describe my old pets (I did care enough about them to remember them), but, again, that’d look more like a list.
why did that convince you? if i imagine an apple on a table i am unable to tell i “see” it or if i “know” it based on all the properties i know it should have. like, is it a mental image or a description mapped into some sort of imagined space?
For me it’s a mental image, which is definitely distinct from a collection of descriptions. I don’t really know how to describe it, but it feels like my head uses circuitry close to other visual circuitry while I’m focusing on this kind of mental image. Almost like the mental image is “injected” into hardware/software used for other visual processing.