In other topic, I would consider this as minor evidence of possibility of nonverbal thought “could you pass me that… thing… the thing that goes under the bolt?”. I.e. Exact name eludes me sometimes, but I do know exactly what I need and what I plan to do with it.
Perceive
> Exact name eludes me sometimes, but I do know exactly what I need and what I plan to do with it.
This is just analytic language. Even if the symbol fails to materialize you can still identify what the symbol refers to via context-clues (analysis)
Or maybe I'm wrong and people have just been using this term to describe mental shit all along!
That's kind of my point, though, we literally don't have the language to figure out how other people perceive things.
Perceive at least disambiguates itself from the senses that aren't related to thought!
you are right, talking about mental processes is difficult. Nobody knows how exactly other person perceive things, there is no objective way to measure things out. (Offtopic: describing smell is also difficult)
In this thread, we see that rudimentary language for it exists.
For example: lot of people use sentence like “to hear my own thoughts” and a lot of people understand that fine.
That is what my partner in the conversation is doing. I am not doing that.
When I think of a plan what’s needed to be done (e.g. something broke in the house, or I need to go to multiple places), usually I know/feel/perceive the gist of my plan instantly. And only after that, I verbalise/visualise it in my head, which takes some time and possibly add more nuance. (Verbalisation/visualisation in my head, is a bit similar to writing things down)
At least for me, there seem to be three (or more) thought processes that complement each other. (Verbal, visual, other)