I do not remember my life and it's fine
aethermug.com
aethermug.com
And just like the author, I couldn't answer questions about hard problems that I've solved, until someone pointed out a moment where I did something they would call an achievements.
Now, at that moment I have the right references. It is still hard to talk about it as an achievement, but at least the recollection is there.
And just like the author, I have an excellent spatial memory, remembering roads and direction, and the ability to use that to recall other details.
I wonder how much of this is related with having ADHD, which often makes things feel like you're merely a spectator in your own mind. While I was never hungry as a child, and had access to a good education, the situation with between my parents had a lasting impact on me.
I have a very hard time "selling myself". I've added solid stuff to my resume in the last year simply recalling what I've done from an outsider's view. From my perspective, I was just messing around. From another perspective, I was building "impressive" "successful" things.
Learning to give myself credit for my accomplishments is what I think made me the difference between a senior engineer and a staff engineer, as silly as that sounds.
I start by writing down the big things: In this year I worked at/for/with ....
WHY was I there: I think about the major projects I did.
WHY was I there: I think (and try to verify) the impact #s/%s those projects had.
WHY was I there: I think about the technical and soft skills needed to make that happen.
WHY do I care: I consider if there is any configuration of things that would make me consider doing the project again.
Having to track past performance as a business made this much clearer -- I adopted the above approach to expand out CV, then developed a similar approach for business development templates to explain recent past work.
I sometimes will drop these templates into an LLM and have it work with me to define or identify ways to better communicate.
I have a giant Markdown-formatted list that I occasionally add to that has all of the random technical junk I've done in it. I add to it occasionally and reference as necessary.
Feeling like a spectator in your own mind is a very difficult phenomenon to deal with and to explain to people who don’t experience it. In a sense, sometimes it almost seems like other peoples lives are more real than mine, because I experience my own from such a peculiar lens. The experience of others seems much less adulterated by that interference. Of course, this is far from true, and only another illusion produced by my weird brain.
Like you I can’t sell myself at all. Not only is the recollection poor, but I give equal weight to my success and failures. I’m far too objective about myself in settings where I’m not supposed to be.
I wonder if this is genetic. I have had a significant number of interviews with people from a couple specific geographic regions that cant relay to me details of a situation where they did XYZ. But given the question simply tell me how they would deal with it.
It made me super curious, because you could see in their job history that they definitely had those experiences but could not recall them.
I mostly blundered my way through this through this recent round of tons of interviews, and by the end of it, my "Tell me about a time when…" doc is actually what it should/could have been at the start!
List everything and grab the high level doc/ticket summary for each. Remove any business strategy and now you have a list of achievements that can jog the memory
I've been updating my resume lately and I've had some LLMs create scripts to call Jira + Linear APIs to fetch all tickets I've had any involvement in and to analyze it. It hallucinates details all the time of course, but I can at least get a rough idea of the things I worked on, cause I'm the same as you and forget immediately what I worked on last week.
I think using the word "conflict" is idiotic, but it helps to rephrase it. Because indeed, like you, I've never in my life had "conflict" with anyone in a work setting, I've had plenty of disagreements though and that's just part of the job/life.
I tend to just make something up here on the spot honestly, because as you said, I'm not keeping a book of grudges where I record every single disagreement I have with a colleague. I'll say something like "On Project X (which I've been talking about during the interview) we had a disagreement on how to do Y. I resolved this by gathering the facts on the pros and cons of method FOO vs method BAR, and we sat down as a team and discussed the approach we preferred to take". The anecdote is usually completely made up, but there's been enough situations during my career where the approach has definitely made sense.
Name a time I had an angry customer? Lol, like, all the time forever? I almost feel like this one must be a trick question designed to catch people who can't deal with the job. I forget about such customers as immediately as possible. As a matter of fact, over the years I've relied on my ability to not reflect other people's temperature or allow their demeanor to take up a lot of space in my field of attention in the first place. I'm not sure if anyone with good chances of coping in this line of work [IT/support/sysadmin was the context when I originally posted this self-quote elsewhere] should really have any honest answers to this question readily available.
I can only name one time I had an angry customer, but obviously I've had countless angry customers. I can name that time because he left a voicemail like four minutes long ranting about how unacceptable it was that we had a full call queue and that he was asked to leave a voicemail, and demanding to be put in touch with various executives. I keep that one in the toolkit because it's easy to twist into inspiring stories about above-and-beyond customer service, or taking ownership, or whatever.
How do I explain something technical to a customer in simpler terms? It's not just me, is it? These seem patently ridiculous, like if they had bothered to do some kind of trial run or think for 30 seconds about how they might answer them, they would have realized...
Or is it just me? Does everyone else have an overt methodology for doing this that they can articulate on demand? I would probably come off like some kind of idiot in that interview. Uh, I dunno. I guess I, like, you know, use the context of the interaction so far to gauge their likely understanding of the salient points? And I audit the explanation for unnecessary tangents and jargon and opaque concepts? I then tailor the explanation to what they need to know and what I think they'll understand in the most useful way in that context? So I guess, in a nutshell, I would say that I explain something technical to a customer in simpler terms by just, like, doing it. This is, like, a bespoke service, sir, perhaps you should try the TJ Maxx down the way.
How do I deal with different personality types? I just, like, do it? This feels like another one where having an answer is a red flag. I've never needed to handle this overtly/consciously either, and I think that's a good sign.
Can I give an example of a situation where I had to go above and beyond for a user? No, and I don't think you grasp the core concept of "above and beyond". If you want some stories about times I didn't have to, let me know.
Edit: Actually, you know what, I do have one of when I "had to go above and beyond" but probably not in the way they're hoping for: https://i.vgy.me/7ZAwjj.jpg
Where do I rate my office suite skills on a scale of 1-10? I'm terribly sorry, I must be in the wrong interview, have a nice day
Like you and the author, I have aphantasia (and possibly SDAM), but through self-reflection and quite a bit of therapy, I've come to believe this specific issue lies more firmly in the domain of ADHD. For me, the problem isn't just an inability to recall achievements, but a failure to feel a sense of achievement for almost anything in the first place.
A very recent example from my own life illustrates this perfectly: For context, I struggled through university for about 12 years without a degree before receiving my ADHD diagnosis. Afterwards, I decided to switch careers and applied for an apprenticeship as an IT specialist for system integration, essentially a helpdesk/support role. Because of my self-taught skills, I was hired directly, skipping the apprenticeship. Intellectually, I know this was a very good outcome. In the 8 months since, I've taken on tasks far beyond my initial role - automating reports, working on internal tooling and a local AI solution, and developing customer-facing tools. Just yesterday, I was officially promoted to Test Automation Engineer with a 50% salary increase.
And I know intellectually that going from applying for an apprenticeship to an engineering role in 8 months is a significant achievement. But I don't feel it as such. My dominant feeling is that, at 35, I'm finally just starting to catch up to my peers. To an outside observer, that probably sounds absurd.
My working theory for this is that it's a mechanism very similar to the common ADHD experience of misplacing keys. The issue isn't a failure to recall the memory of where you put them. The problem is that the memory was never properly encoded in the first place, because your attention was already split between several other thoughts at that moment. You can't retrieve a memory that was never saved.
I suspect something similar happens with achievements. If an event doesn't register emotionally as an "achievement" at the moment it happens, the brain doesn't file it under that tag. It just gets stored as another factual event - 'a thing that happened' - which makes it incredibly difficult to retrieve when a prompt like "tell me about a time you solved a hard problem" specifically asks for something from the 'achievements' file.
This makes a lot of sense to me in a not good way. Thank you for writing it.
I thought about this more on my commute home from work, and I'm starting to suspect that "SDAM" might essentially be the long-term effects of alexithymia or interoceptive blind spots, which are fairly common in neurodivergent people with ADHD, autism, or both.
For context, alexithymia is a significant difficulty in recognizing, sourcing, and describing one's own emotions. Interoception is the sense of your internal bodily state.
You can likely relate to being so deep in a flow state that you don't notice how badly you need to use the restroom, or how hungry you are, until the feeling becomes so overwhelming it finally breaks through your focus. That's an interoceptive blind spot in action.
So, to further elaborate on my theory: If alexithymia raises the required signal strength for an emotion to be consciously recognized as significant, our brains - which strive for efficiency - will only tag and store memories that cross that unusually high threshold of "important." All the "little things," even the nice ones, get dropped because they never registered with enough emotional weight at the moment they happened.
The brain prioritizes emotionally significant information for memory storage. If an event doesn't trigger a sufficiently strong or clearly identifiable emotional response at the moment it occurs - because your baseline emotional processing is affected - it might get stored as just factual information rather than a rich, emotionally resonant autobiographical memory. It becomes "a thing that happened" rather than an "experience I had that affected me emotionally."
This explains my memory pattern perfectly: I remember most big family holidays - Christmas, birthdays, weddings - because those come with heightened emotional anticipation and distinct social components. But I'm already struggling to piece together what we did on Easter this year, and have absolutely no idea what we did last year. The quieter, more routine positive events apparently don't meet that higher "emotional importance" threshold for deep encoding.
It's like having a filter that's calibrated too conservatively - it's protecting you from information overload. Perhaps that's why it's so common in neurodivergent people, both ADHD and autism heavily affect how we take in and process external sensations. If there's any positive spin to this theory, that I will agree with you, makes sense in a not good way, it might be that. But, unfortunately, it's also discarding experiences that others would naturally encode as meaningful memories.
However, I would challenge the premise that SDAM is entirely unrelated to emotional processing. It's important to distinguish between the conscious feeling of an emotion and its subconscious role in the mechanics of memory formation. There's significant evidence that emotional salience is a crucial part of how the brain tags and consolidates strong autobiographical memories. A disruption to this process doesn't have to be a consciously felt emotional deficit; it can be a mechanical one operating below the level of awareness.
We can look at this as two distinct points of failure in the memory pipeline:
Failure at the input stage: If the emotional signal required to "tag" an event as important for rich autobiographical encoding is never met, the memory is formed, but only as a semantic fact ("a thing that happened"), not a re-experiencable episode. The processing can't happen because the right input was never provided.
Failure at the retrieval and re-experiencing stage: For someone with aphantasia but no issues with alexithymia (like you, I'd assume), the initial emotional tagging might function perfectly well. The disruption happens later. The core deficit of SDAM is the inability to "mentally time travel" and re-experience the past. Aphantasia, by definition, removes a primary tool for this: visual imagination. The brain processes and integrates emotions by revisiting them. If you cannot truly "re-live" a moment because the visual data is inaccessible, then the episodic, first-person quality is lost.
This second point matters beyond just losing access to nostalgia. We process and regulate emotions by mentally revisiting experiences, integrating them into our broader life narrative. If you have greater difficulty "re-living" moments of joy, achievement, or connection because you lack the tool of visual imagination, your ability to extract meaning from them and build emotional understanding is compromised.
Both mechanisms effectively lead to the same subjective experience: a past that feels like "someone else's life" that you know facts about but can't emotionally (re)connect with. The specific pathway might vary between individuals, but I now strongly believe that the underlying issue remains the disrupted relationship between emotional processing and autobiographical memory formation.
Does this potential explanation align more with your personal experience?
I might have to spend some time over the long weekend to explore this a bit more, and to properly back it up with studies.
I feel my emotions strongly as I live through them(as much as one can say, we can't feel others' feelings), but feel them not at all when I relive them (because I cannot relive them). My emotions are a guide for me, but after the initial feeling of them, they guide me semantically (why was I feeling anger during a particular conversation? maybe I need to reconsider my position).
Incidentally, I generally think of this as being able to "let go" of emotions/grudges/etc that I might otherwise spend unnecessary time worrying over. It does set me up for being an "especially boilable frog" in that I can quickly acclimate to conditions that others might have trouble with.
Oh yup. The way I've always described myself is I have extremely "muted" emotions, bordering on none the overwhelming vast majority of the time. I only very rarely feel extreme emotions of any kind.
> This explains my memory pattern perfectly: I remember most big family holidays - Christmas, birthdays, weddings - because those come with heightened emotional anticipation and distinct social components. But I'm already struggling to piece together what we did on Easter this year, and have absolutely no idea what we did last year. The quieter, more routine positive events apparently don't meet that higher "emotional importance" threshold for deep encoding.
I don't remember hardly anything about my own past outside of factual information, and that tends to fade rather extremely with time. Even times when I was quite literally sobbing I don't remember the emotional impact of, just the fact that it happened, sometimes not even the cause.
On the other hand, I have extremely good factual memory about random shit and can usually build up a solid approximation for how something works from first principles on demand for an extremely broad array of things. Trade-offs, I guess.
It's what I imagine being an AI would feel like from the perspective of the AI.
I remember infuriating my mother almost every day after school when she'd ask "How was it?" and I would just shrug and say, "I don't know."
She thought I was being evasive or something, but I was being completely honest. I genuinely didn't have an answer because my internal state was, as you describe perfectly, muted. Most of the time, I just felt... like a neutral, warm grey. Well - still do. There was no data to report.
> I don't remember hardly anything about my own past outside of factual information, and that tends to fade rather extremely with time. Even times when I was quite literally sobbing I don't remember the emotional impact of, just the fact that it happened, sometimes not even the cause.
I think remembering the fact of sobbing but not the feeling is the perfect distinction between semantic memory ("a thing that happened") and autobiographical memory ("an experience I had"). The factual data point was recorded, but the emotional qualia wasn't encoded for retrieval.
> On the other hand, I have extremely good factual memory about random shit and can usually build up a solid approximation for how something works from first principles on demand for an extremely broad array of things. Trade-offs, I guess.
I wouldn't even necessarily call it a trade-off so much as a logical consequence. If the brain's system for storing rich, first-person experiential data is impaired, it makes sense that it would rely on and strengthen its system for storing third-person factual data. The "what" gets stored efficiently because the "how it felt to be me when it happened" isn't taking up much space on the hard drive.
> It's what I imagine being an AI would feel like from the perspective of the AI.
Sounds about right to me. I feel the same. I have access to the facts, like my I'd argue objectively fairly impressive achievement I described above, but I don't seem to have the emotional data. So, I can reason myself into knowing that I achieved something - but I'm not feeling it.
This is possibly touching on the problem I'm trying to navigate lately. Someone will display observable emotionality while denying the subjective experience. I'm not sure what to do with it. I'm not trying to cure them or anything, all I want is to get them to understand that their lack of internal experience of emotion doesn't improve things out here, where I'm still dealing with an agitated person yelling at me about how fine they are. Does this seem to align or does it sound unrelated, you think?
I've been 100% immersed in AI all of 2025, and I think it's impacting my communication skills -- especially the way I write.
Wouldn't it be amusing if after the disruptive period of AI's rise is over, people with ADHD end up being highly sought after for our ability to communicate clearly with them?
Our brains are workhorses of indexing things. Of course we have varying attention, especially when we already "get" what was shown to us. When others have to practice it over and over, we just "get it" and move on to something more interesting (and worthy of indexing). Taking medication to "address" this active attention mechanism is going to affect our ability to form good indexing habits.
Although I was suspended from community college, I had no problem teaching myself linear algebra or diff eq. I eventually was able to get a job as a software dev, it took me until age 28, when someone else perhaps could have reached it right out of college. I'm now trying to finish a dual math and comp sci degree in my spare time, and even now I've still failed trivial courses.
I was among the brightest students in my class growing up, but willfully chose to stop taking my ADHD meds in 8th grade. I was a stellar student until then. I've resumed them only very recently, but I have complete confidence that had I chosen to remain on the meds the whole time, I wouldn't have faced all the same challenges.
I don't think the evidence aligns with your understanding.
So it's not even a disabling disorder. You struggle with formal education (me too!), so maybe formal education is the problem. "Formal education" as we know it today is not a solved thing. We don't actually know the best way to spread knowledge, we just happen to be doing it this way at this moment in history.
If you want to take medication to be good at that, I HIGHLY ENCOURAGE you to do so, and I'm very happy for your current successes.
It is a terrible standard by which to create a medical diagnosis and feed children medications.
I understand where you're coming from -- but you should also know how crazy it is to read this about ADHD as a 41-year-old that spent from ages 19 to 22 unable to function as an adult due to executive function disregulation.
Can you give me more info about being unable to function? Were you truly unable to live or did you just make a ton of bad decisions that you now regret?
this isn't a real standard
>An individual with a disability is defined by the ADA as a person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment.
People with ADHD have all sorts of recorded impairments including things like being more likely to cause traffic accidents.
It's currently popular in some progressive circles to insist that neurodivergencies are "not disabilities" and I don't like it.
Sure, the accommodations are pretty simple: Stimulants, awareness, some help with forming good habits and training on project management and life management. But it exists.
My friend is a dwarf. His chemistry accommodation is also simple. It's a stool, and an understanding that he won't be lifting large, filled flasks anywhere. He does very good chemistry other than that, and most of his work time is spent doing statistics on the chemistry he does. But pretending he isn't different is doing him a disservice. (He also dislikes "little person" and prefers dwarf because he's a LOTR fan).
>it's probably not actually even real at the scale that it is currently diagnosed (15% of boys!). Certainly should not be so heavily medicated at that scale
This is FUD. Worse, it's the exact FUD that is the reason I was not diagnosed as a child ("he's doing well in school, can't possibly have ADHD, we can't be giving kids stimulants, they'll bounce off the walls!) and why my sister was "tested" for ADHD in the 90s and found to "not have it" despite very definitely having it and being trivially diagnosed decades later.
Your disbelief that psychologists are able to do their job is responsible for the exact spike of adult ADHD diagnosis that people point to as "can't be real".
Meanwhile, giving stimulants to children with ADHD is demonstrably effective and has lasting, proven effects on long term life success. There's even evidence of physiological improvements in brain development.
US numbers are in the same ballpark as other countries. Even countries like South Korea with a significantly more regimented and constricted view of society.
Why is it so surprising that actually, human brains arrange themselves in very different ways? The idea that the "normal" brain is actually normal is just a wrong assumption. Neurodivergencies are significantly inherited, so it's more like "There's a couple lineages of humans whose brains are wired differently and have different ways of working. The percentage of people with neurodivergencies are just the percentage of the human race descended from those lineages.
My brain is built different man, stop insisting that smart people who have demonstrated that shouldn't be trusted about dealing with that. The only people you hurt are the exact people who have to go through hell to get very necessary medication that improves their lives because people like you cast us all as pill seekers even though stimulants do not have that effect for people with ADHD and a tiktok self diagnoses is not even close to enough to get a prescription for medication! Pushing amphetamines on anyone who contacts you is exactly what got a bunch of pill mills shut down during COVID, and also got BetterHelp slapped and it's still controversial to advertise them.
Understand, getting medicated requires jumping through hoops like keeping several appointments. It's harder to keep a stimulant prescription than it is to keep an Oxycontin prescription even after the opioid epidemic.
I have had an ADHD diagnosis in the past and I am 100% on board with this. Maybe the things I can't pay attention to aren't worth paying attention to and I should be working on something else.
>Taking medication to "address" this active attention mechanism
I also noticed that when taking medication I became really good at boring, non-creative work, but I struggled with deep or innovative thinking. I decided I'd rather be good at deep/innovative things, even if it costs me my ability to do some mundane things for hours at a time.
When these things are vital things like feeding yourself, going to work, of driving, this absolutely does not apply. Without treatment, I often cannot even get myself to do things I want to and are fun. ADHD isn't "I can't pay attention to a boring movie", it's executive dysfunction.
Need data one this one. I don't believe anyone has starved because they didn't have the executive function to feed themselves.
there's a world of difference between literally starving and being unable to break focus on something to feed yourself and maintain a healthy weight and ensure that you're getting all the vitamins and nutrients your body needs to operate beyond a minimal level (especially as you age). i've definitely skipped multiple meals before while caught up in something and it ruins the rest of my day, my sleep, and impacts me moving forward beyond that til i can reach more of an equilibrium.
edit: i see from your other comments that you're not really willing to accept that some people have issues with their brains that make them behave differently from the idealized version of yourself that you hold in your head. so whatever. i hope you grow some empathy for others.
Substances help in the short term, but they can't be the thing that "solves" the problem, no matter how it is presented (starving vs. good nutrition through attention to what one eats and when they eat). It can't be that a person can ONLY function with a substance dependence for mental phenomenon.
While mental health is a sensitive subject, I don't think it is a "protected" status given many humans suffer from bad mental health from time to time, or constantly, depending on their experience. We've all been in contact with some type of mental health issue with ourselves or others, and we should always approach it from a standpoint of empathy when dealing with others directly. Having empathy online is tricky, and usually involves just not saying anything as opposed to speaking what we think is the truth (for ourselves). Too many people fish for empathy online in my opinion, and real empathy is likely only delivered (well) in a person to person context. It is literally responding physically to another's emotions, as well as understanding why we should have empathy for their emotional output (and doing something besides crying with them in the moment). That is compassion.
In terms of my comment, it was based entirely on my protecting my children from being put on a drug that probably isn't good (or useful) for those of us that don't visualize, long term. There is ZERO evidence that taking amphetamines for long periods of time is good for you. Google lists this as one side effect of ADHD substances: "While some studies suggest positive effects on brain development, other research indicates potential negative impacts on the nucleus accumbens, an area of the brain related to motivation and reward."
Anyway, no more about that. Below is a very fresh "nooticing" — straight from my brain to ChatGPT to you;
Child 1) Me, male, left handed, ADHD-PI, aphantasia, strong spacial ability. Child 2) Female, right handed, ADHD-PI, good mental imagery, dyslexia, long time smoker. Child 3) Female, right handed, ADHD-PI, good mental imagery.
That's all of us, born around late-80's. I didn't dump that all that in to chatGPT (more of a drip-feed), but a pattern emerged quickly regardless; FYI: ADHD is in the Prefrontal Cortex (front of brain), whilst Dyslexia is in the Left Temporal Lobe (~mid left).
> Some studies suggest that fetal development could influence handedness. The position of the baby in the womb and the amount of hormonal exposure (such as testosterone levels) may have an impact on whether a person becomes left-handed or right-handed. Some theories propose that exposure to higher levels of testosterone during pregnancy may increase the likelihood of a person being left-handed.
> Spatial abilities are often tied to the right hemisphere of the brain, which might explain why some people with ADHD-PI (especially left-handed individuals) can develop enhanced spatial reasoning skills, even though their challenges with focus and attention are more prominent.
> Aphantasia, the inability to create mental images, has been linked to differences in how the brain processes and integrates visual information, particularly in the right hemisphere, which is responsible for spatial and visual processing.
> ADHD-PI and Dyslexia often co-occur, and research has shown that people with ADHD are at a higher risk of developing dyslexia or other learning disabilities, particularly dyslexia.
> Testosterone plays a critical role in fetal development, particularly in sexual differentiation (deciding whether a fetus develops as male or female). However, higher-than-normal levels of testosterone exposure during pregnancy can influence brain development, potentially affecting handedness, as well as behavioral tendencies (like aggression, risk-taking, and cognitive development).
> Elevated testosterone levels in utero have been linked to prenatal androgen exposure (often associated with more male-like traits), which may influence cognitive abilities and behavior: - Some studies suggest it could lead to enhanced spatial abilities and higher aggression. - On the flip side, it may increase the risk for neurodevelopmental disorders like ADHD or dyslexia, depending on how it affects brain regions involved in attention, language, and executive function.
> There are a few reasons why a mother might have elevated levels of testosterone during pregnancy: - 1. Maternal Health Conditions (e.g., Polycystic Ovary Syndrome - PCOS) - 2. Stress During Pregnancy: Stress—especially chronic stress—can increase the levels of certain hormones, like cortisol. However, there is also some evidence suggesting that stress can lead to altered hormone balance, which might include an increase in testosterone levels. - 3. Maternal Obesity - 4. External or Environmental Hormone Exposure: Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are substances that can interfere with the body's hormonal systems. Some EDCs mimic or disrupt normal hormone functions, potentially leading to higher levels of testosterone in the body. These chemicals can be found in a variety of products, from plastics to pesticides.
Testosterone is the common thread there, and so the question is: why did mum have so much? She was both a stress-head and smoker, but I can't ask her any specifics, because she's dead. So in hind-sight I would say that she had ADHD as well, and so she must have been internalising many things that would then lead to overthinking, which would cause stress and anxiety ("over-worry" sort of thing).
Her and dad also smoked cigarettes forever since I can remember, but they would always go outside. I'm not sure if she smoked whilst pregnant, but I would have thought so, because the advice to quit may not have been common? My sister reckons she didn't though - so I don't know. Regardless, dad would have been smoking, but even when smoking outside, it's well known that 2nd and 3rd hand smoke can affect kids.
So I already suspected the smoking link (the nicotine to dopamine connection), but I didn't realise my left-handedness, spacial reasoning and aphantasia would all be implicated.
Oh man, I don't have aphantasia (though I do have unusually poor autobiographical memory), and things like this happen to me all the time. Even more embarrassing is when I introduce myself to someone and they say "we've met several times before."
On the other hand I'm extremely good at recognizing people from their gait. I can see someone in the far distance and know who they are, even if we haven't met in years. For some reason I also recognize people from how they place their shoes.. as when I walked in somewhere and saw a pair of shoes and immediately knew that it was one of my cousins I hadn't seen in ten years.
The not recognizing people in unexpected locations is something I just mark down to "page fault" and move on. Nobody expects total recall anyway.
I just kind of forgot that some people are just that good at recognizing others. It's something I can't relate to at all, so it's a concept that just slips away from my mental models. But I suppose that's always how it is when you try to conceptualize how another being experiences the world.
I assume these are difficult for anyone who hasn't prepared for them.
I've always attributed this to the fact that we usually never categorize/conceptualize events in these terms in the first place.
Isn’t just living and thinking preparing for questions like this? They’re not that hard.
I'm convinced neurotypical people just lie through their teeth in these STAR interviews. It'd be so easy to just tell them some bullshit story. It sure seems like they only want to hear some absolute bullshit.
Companies absolutely will lie and cheat if they can get away with it, for example by saying their hiring budget is only X amount for the role when the recruiter knows full well the real budget is X + 20,000. They will absolutely lie about things like PTO and flexibility. So there's no reason for you not to also engage in it, because you're really only screwing yourself over if you don't. It's unfortunate, but that's the system we've built.
They want you to pretend like you were a cowboy coder in a regulated environment where redundancy is a requirement, not a dirty word.
I dunno if they’ve just spent too much time chatting to stochastic parrots, if we desperately need to bring back onsite interviews, or if HR is deliberately sabotaging anyone with integrity. God knows only a psychopath could work in HR and still sleep at night. But you’re right. Let them eat slop.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situation,_task,_action,_resul...
Off the top of my head without really stopping and thinking for a while I can often only come up with some boring and generic examples.
To expand on that: questions about travel are my Achilles heel when it comes to dating. “So, where have you been, and what did you do while there?” Well, I took a trip to Iceland with my ex-girlfriend, and I’ve been all over the place with my family, but… I don’t remember the names of the places, and I don’t remember all that much of historical sites and such. Probably doesn’t help that I’m not all that engaged with the names of places / things to start with (vs simply experiencing the thing itself), so that’s in one ear and out the other. What I do recall is conversation and feelings of connectedness, and a couple snapshots of particularly picturesque scenery. But which cities? Which museums/sites/regions? What did I do while there? No idea. I actually rehearse such scenarios before dates to avoid an awkward first impression.
I’m great at remembering how things are connected, why something is the way it is, and how things work. But I couldn’t remember individual facts (names, numbers, the chronological order of independent experiences, etc) to save my life. But most of life is made up of individual, isolated details — which then means that most of life isn’t very memorable for me.
I have to keep a list of everything in a doc of some sort or I can't remember anything I've "accomplished"... and I when I tell my coworkers that my memory resets every weekend and half of Monday is spent rediscovering what it is I'm supposed to be doing all week, they think I'm joking.
I've solved some programming problems that I considered quite mundane and unremarkable, yet others think it was some great achievement.
While it might have been hard at the time, in hindsight the events seem unremarkable and just me doing my routine duties.
> "Write about a time during your university studies in which you faced a difficult problem, and what you did to overcome it."
I guess the university example I could spin a story about how I failed a subject and had to repeat it and got high marks the second time round. The thing is I probably won't remember the event if I'm in an interview and under pressure.
When I started writing this post, I couldn't think of anything difficult that I had to overcome in my CompSci degree. It took me a while to even remember failing that subject, and in hindsight I don't have any emotional attachment to the event. It just doesn't stand out in my memory as remarkable or interesting or even difficult. I did change up my tactics the second time around and did quite well in the subject, so I have material for a story.
The problem is most of the time I don't even remember failing that subject. Even if I did remember, I'd probably dismiss it as I don't remember it being difficult.
In the performance review you now need to say "On this Tuesday I needed to get from the salon to the baker so I initiated by motor neurone and walked out of the salon. This made me get there in 5 minutes which had the impact of my mum getting her cinnamon scroll" and you have to remember that happened. For those with worse memory this is an extra job. If you don't do it you get discriminated against.
"Tell me about a time when you tripped over while commuting."
"Tell me about a time when your feet touched each other during a walk."
"Tell me about a time when you were facing north-east and a bus passed in front of you." [follow-up question] "What type of bus was it? [suburban, long distance, etc] You say you saw it, so walk me by your visual experience."
If you have lived your life as a walking person, as you seem to imply by your comment, you surely have done these things multiple times, right? Failing to respond in a truthful and satisfactory manner will be counted heavily against you.
Yes, that's the problem
Though, as someone who's done a number of those interviews over the years, I'd replace the word truthful with manner that the interviewer regards as truthful
I have jobs I've spent four years at that right now I can only account for what might be 2 months of work. If I stop and think hard, I might squeeze out another 2 months of recollections.
For those of us who sometimes have trouble with "tell me about a time..." interview questions, but have no trouble recalling relevant examples when discussing an actual real-world question... I wonder whether part of the problem is the interview context is activating different thinking, and maybe you just need to trick yourself with a mental prompt, like:
"The interview is a colleague who is having trouble with a situation like this, and what advice would you give them, and what relevant supporting examples pop into mind? Great, now change gears, remember you're in a bad interview for some company that apparently does bad interviews, but don't tell the interviewer that, and instead carefully speak the most straightforward and uncontroversial example you thought of, in unhelpful STAR format. So that the interviewer can checkbox that you used STAR format. Bonus points if you can twist it to hit a Leadership Principle, and you should mention the Leadership Principle by name, so the interviewer doesn't miss it."
When I get a question like this, I have to find a more concrete approach to retrieve things I did (e.g. "what kinds of problems did I work on together with Sarah in the Compiler Design class"), and then filter them for difficult things that had interesting solutions.
One of my favorite managers comes across as a very charismatic person who always had great stories to tell about his life and work. After working with him for years, it became clear he had half a dozen decent stories he could tell well and rotated through them. Enough new people were introduced and others enjoyed his stories so would encourage it "Tell them about the time you worked for the Canadian Mafia!" They were crafted by that point. He didn't have to "remember" them so much as they were tools in his belt that he could pull out on demand. I'd guarantee some of those stories come out when he interviews somewhere.
Granted, many can't draw at all, but people's inability to reproduce from memory an object of some complexity that they see (and likewise, use) every day is telling.
Also the well-documented inaccuracy of eye-witness testimony.
I find it absolutely inconceivable that someone could be unable to draw a bicycle in Liverpool or a similar city.
I am not sure this is related to what OP is talking about.
If you find this inconceivable, IMO you're assuming other people's minds work more similarly to yours than they actually do!
In my case (not aphantasic, but I think my visual imagination is significantly weaker than average), the information just didn't seem to be filed in full detail. The image was weak, as are most of my mental images, and I guess I had never paid that much attention to the concept (i.e. how the parts of the bike fit together as a whole; when I had had to pay attention, it had been to specific things like how the brakes work, how to reattach the chain, etc.), so it was all a bit of a muddle.
I couldn't draw a detailed 3D technical drawing of a derailleur, but I can draw a sketch of a bicycle without needing a photo reference!
I have aphantasia, I have no voluntary visual component to my mind as far as I can tell. I also have quite a good memory. If I were to draw a bike from memory I suspect I would make similar mistakes as those.
One thing I have noticed in the threads that come up about aphantasia is comments either directly or indirectly calling into question its validity. I want to share a test I got from another HN comment, so I won’t take credit, that I have found to be the easiest way to explain to people how completely absent the visual component is for me.
Close your eyes and imagine a ball bouncing across a table. Imagine the sound it makes as it goes. Bounce. Bounce. Bounce. What colour is it?
Most people I ask answer this question without hesitation. It’s easy, because they were just looking at it, maybe still are. I have asked this question of various friends tens of times, and I still don’t know what colour the ball is for me because it doesn’t exist. I know what a bouncing ball looks like, I know the sound it makes. I know what colour it could be. But I’ve never seen it.
That is aphantasia. It’s not foggy, or blurry, or “low fidelity”, it’s just nothingness.
One, I couldn't tell you what sound a ball makes when it bounces on a table. I've never thought about absence of other senses but, thinking about it a bit, I can't really think of what a glass feels like or a fire smells like either. I have descriptions for all of them, like a glass is hard or a fire smells like.. smoke? Not really the best description. But in all of these cases, I instantly know I'm touching a glass or smelling a fire when it happens.
Two, I only thought of the ball in terms of the parabola it makes. When I read the color question, I can assign a color to it, but nothing in my "imagination" changes. There's just another word, blue or whatever, associated with it.
Thanks for making me think!
Despite aphantasia I have always been able to conceptualise spatial relationships, but it feels much less like trying to visualise it, and much more like "understanding" the fundamental properties connecting each thing.
If I tell you to draw a (low detail, toy, 2d) car, you probably would be able to - and quickly so.
However, if I ask you to describe the shape of the car, you would certainly take a lot more time to think of a description anywhere near as accurate as what you've drawn.
So what did you draw? Clearly not a description, as you do not have that available. Instead, you drew the image you have in your mind.
Since I see so many people talking about having aphantasia, I assume my thinking is wrong somewhere. Can you tell me where I went wrong in this thought process? Do you, contrary to my assumption, actually have an accurate description of all the shapes you could draw (a car, a tree, a circus tent) readily available?
- you assume the outcome of your experiment which is not a given
- even if the outcome is what you assume it is: there's the possibility of other explanations: for example having a pen paper to draw the car serves as an aid that helps them draw the car without having to imagine it. Just like having pen and paper can help me compute the square root of 4572847 without having to imagine the computation in my mind.
My wife and I have very different navigation skills. She can almost always tell me the compass direction and she's very good at relative directions. If she's in the house, she can instantly point in the correct direction of our children's school. I've got to stop and think through the steps I'd take to get there. I have to "reason" it out and she can just "see" it. It's almost like she's looking at a map of places and I'm dealing with a graph of nodes. I can walk the graph and understand how places are connected. But I can't really step back and see the bigger picture like she can. And I've got a lot of gaps in my graph because I only add nodes when needed. I could drive by a church a hundred times and not be able to tell you it exists. But when my daughter has a girl scouts meetings there, the graph gets updated.
Things like cars or airplanes, I could draw well enough to impress friends as a kid. That was partly partly due to constant classroom doodling. And, this was only for certain iconic types that I really studied. E.g. the round headlights of a classic Porsche 911 or the front view of an F4 Phantom II fighter yet from a Vietnam war movie. Even then, I couldn't really picture them directly, but I could _feel_ their 3D topography and use that almost like a surface model to feed into my hand acting as a 3D rendering pipeline. I don't see the image and reproduce it. I somehow feel the spatial model projecting onto the page and then try to pencil in that feeling before it dissipates. Yet, I can't do that for everyday items like my own car, laptop computer, or toothbrush. I can draw a generic representation, but can't remember and then reproduce any of the distinguishing characteristics that make my own possessions unique compared to the generic concept.
Similarly, I'm not face-blind, but I cannot remember and reconstruct any of the faces I know. I know them when I see them. I can also feel a lot of "this person looks a lot like that person", which sometimes helps me realize the specific expression features, angles, proportions, or even dynamics that are triggering my recognition. But I can't really recite any of that to tell you what I recognize.
I'm a bit like someone else said earlier in the thread. Imagining a bouncing ball, it's a feeling of the diminishing parabolas in 3D. You might sketch it the way a cartoonist shows a trace in the air behind something to indicate movement. But that's already more visual than my own imagining of it, which is more like a faint echo of that cartoon trace. And, it is somehow both dynamic and static. I feel the linked chain of parabolas all at once, but also somehow feel the movement vectors.
If you told me to imagine a particular type of ball, I could even imagine different trajectories and deformations, e.g. a hard rubber "superball" vs an old tired tennis ball vs a big squishy dodgeball from elementary school. But just asked to imagine a ball, I wouldn't select such details. It would just be the abstract path. And even when specialized, I still don't really see the ball or any color, just a feeling of the spatial scene that it traverses.
For me, this aphantasia is all about my waking/voluntary mental mode. I can have completely vivid lucid dreams which can sometimes be mundanely realistic and sometimes surreal. If I'm very tired, I might also get some imagery right as I near the hynogogic threshold. This is true for imagined vision, hearing, proprioception, and touch senses. They are all very "abstract" when awake and take form as the waking world slips away.
Not sure it is relevant, but I also have no internal monologue whether awake or in dreams. I can think about words or speech, but it is abstract and a bit like composing them in an editing buffer (which, due to aphantasia I can't really see!). Thinking is not at all like talking nor like listening.
I do have a list of attributes in my head for things. Things like cars are, in my opinion, not the best example since everyone has seen a car, say, millions of times (that's weird to think about). So the list of attributes is both large and constantly "refreshed" - not unlike dynamic RAM.
However, relatively unique objects, in terms of sightings, have a much shorter list. Not only is the list short, it may be inaccurate. This can lead to, as an absurd example, thinking a car has five wheels and they're on top of the car.
One of the reasons these phenomena seem incredible (as in credibility), I think, is that people don't tend to draw cars as a heap of possibly incorrect attributes. If I drew you a box which encased four wheels, a steering wheel, panes of glass, and doors all randomly placed and called it a car, you'd not be wrong to suggest I see a physician. However, I still have a functioning brain which has experienced reality. I can piece together a short list of attributes because I know that wheels roll, objects have mass, and gravity pulls all towards the grave.
Another way to think about this which is maybe more accessible (although analogues are never perfect) is language. Everyone occasionally encounters words that they're aware of but don't know the meaning of or have assigned an incorrect meaning. That doesn't mean they can't see, hear, or write the word. It's just that, if you press them on it, they either can't give you a definition or they produce an incorrect definition. To continue the analogy, if you know enough about a language, you can give a good guess at an unknown word based on your experience with other words.
Obviously this is just my experience, and I hope this along with the other comments sheds some light on the topic.
To this day, one of the things that comes to mind when I think of a "door" is the way I conceptualized it before I knew there was a word. The best I can describe it is a combination of the act of reaching for a doorknob, followed by a plane hung vertically, pivoting inward from the right side. It seems to come from the act of opening a door... but the weirdest part is that while I was an infant in my memories of that type of internal dialogue, the conceptual representation I described describes the motion an adult would use to open a door.
I don't have aphantasia, have a very strong spatial sense, and ADHD-PI is a huge part of my life.
Similarly, I can't hear a particular song in my head even if it's an earworm. Instead, I hear a rough approximation of it as if I were trying to describe it to someone else (instruments as mouth sounds, bad falsetto, and so on)
I can tell apart a strawberry from a pineapple, but I can't re-experience a taste later. If I want to compare two things, I need to taste them back to back. Or I need to write down what I think to compare with next time.
But I have no problem remembering things like: how crunchy or floppy the pizza was. That's not taste.
I have no doubt that many of my recollections are bad, but I can imagine essentially every detail of a bicycle, all the mechanical components and how they interact.
As I understand it, this is extremely uncommon, perhaps you might be categorized as hyperphantasia. How's your memory? They're commonly linked attributes, as per the article, some people with hyperphantasia have hsam - highly superior autobiographical memory, apparently from being able to conjure such accurate mental images.
I could do a decent job a drawing a bicycle and know the names of the parts because I’ve done a lot of the maintenance on my bike so I’m pretty familiar with it mechanically.
In some cases, it very well may be familiarity, but for some of us, it's just memory and visualization.
Was this study done on aboriginals living in a rainforest that have never gone to a paved part of the world where people use bicycles?
Sure, I'd get a bit flustered if asked to draw a modern mountain bike with rear suspension. Err... there's a spring back there... somewhere?
But an ordinary road bike? How could you get that wrong?
This bicycle example really helps me appreciate the difference between how things are in my mind compared to most people's, and I appreciate your sharing it!
To presume knowledge of another's mind's eye is to commit a fundamental epistemic error. Having conducted extensive interviews with hundreds of subjects, I've discovered that visualization manifests along a vast spectrum of human experience, each with its own unique phenomenology and nomenclature. For some, the mind's eye is void; for others, it blazes with such intensity that it eclipses physical sight itself.
The bicycle-drawing analogy fundamentally misconstrues the relationship between mental representation and motor expression. These are orthogonal cognitive faculties—one need not be a sculptor to possess perfect proprioceptive knowledge of one's own face.
The eyewitness testimony example actually undermines the original argument. The critical factor isn't visual recall but temporal-causal sequencing—the who, what, and when of events. My research suggests that aphantasics demonstrate superior accuracy in reconstructing factual sequences, unencumbered by the distortions of visual reconstruction. Indeed, one might argue that the ideal witness would be someone who processes experience without the intermediary of visualization.
This points to a deeper truth about cognitive diversity: what some dismiss as deficit may in fact represent an alternative—and in certain contexts, superior—mode of engaging with reality. The visualizer's mind performs an act of creation with each recall, reconstructing and thereby potentially corrupting the original experience. The aphantasic mind, conversely, may preserve information in a more pristine, unrendered state—accessing facts without the degradation inherent in repeated mental imaging.
This is not merely a neurological curiosity but a profound philosophical distinction: between those who remember through representation and those who remember through direct apprehension. Each mode carries its own epistemic advantages, and our insistence on privileging the visual may blind us to entirely different ways of knowing.
The map view in Google photos / Apple photos is often my key to looking up the date of a memory. Well... really is that I know I’ve been to certain places, but have no actual memory of being there, so I look up the locations in the map view of Photos, see the photos, and that triggers actual memories.
I’m sentimental about objects for a similar reason. I don’t recall lots of memories with people, but when I see or touch an object that is associated with an extant-but-inaccessible memory, the memory comes back to me in living color, so to speak.
My late wife passed way six years and six days ago, and I’m still in the process of giving her clothes and things away to charity / finding new homes for them. It’s extremely difficult for me, because I don’t have much recall of particular memories of the 12 years we were married or the 8 years we were together before that, and I worry that losing access to these totems will cut off even the tenuous access to the memories I have of her.
Touching objects for me doesnt help, though looking at pictures does. Ive tried to get her to make scrapbooks for every year we have been together with explanations and stories, but no luck so far.
She remembers what we both were wearing the day we met.
I'm pleasantly surprised that this thread has multiple threads about loved ones and grieving.
He said he doesn’t have any “first-person” memories. Most people, even if they forget most things they do day-to-day, and don’t have great “indices” of their memories, can think back on certain times where they remember being there, doing a thing, probably with some visuals associated with that, which can be played back. This person said that none of the things they remember that they did, they can remember personally doing, if that makes sense.
For me, I have scattered samples, like once in a while throughout my life, my brain sort of takes a snapshot and forms a memory. I can imagine myself back in each place I lived, for example, or each place I worked, or graduating from college, or walking on the beach.
I can't describe how many times someone's asked me what I did last weekend and I told them that I did just had a quiet one at home, then later I'm reminded I actually went skiing or something notable that I completely forgot. Not just passing conversations with strangers either, this happens with family just as much.
I take a more pessimistic view on how it affects my life than the author does though. He handwaves the downsides even saying that he '... had learned my lessons from them [trials in university], even though I forgot how they unfolded.' I understand the desire to think that but I'm not sure how you can really justify it. The brain definitely learns to compensate in other ways and I have really unbalanced cognitive tests I took as a kid as evidence, but memory deficiencies are undoubtedly a disadvantage.
It's interesting though because I associate with a lot of what the article is talking about with spatial and knowledge memory too. I often have to remember where something was to "step into" the memory again.
This is wild!
In general, without some kind of trigger my ability to remember specific episodes is nonexistent. The OP talks about this too but those times when you have to give 3 fun facts about yourself or when someone asks my hobbies are moments of of existential dread because I genuinely have no idea what to say.
I realised recently that there are whole years of my life I'm basically missing when I think back. Like I know where I was living, what job I was working, and my general circumstances, just not anything specific I actually did.
Like the author i rely on mental models (I wrote a book called visual models for software requirements), Im good at getting to the heart of things and am constantly organizing information so I can remember the principle.
I do get anxiety about not remembering people once they pass away. I might only remember a few things about them. But when I look at pictures I can often times remember all kinds of details. I think some of the information is there, it just isnt retrievable.
Im bad at networking, when I go to events lots of people know me, but I have no idea who they are. Im waiting for glasses with cameras that will identify people for me and go over their background.
Aphantasia is supposed to be rare, but I think many engineers have it. At least at my company it seems more prevalent than it is supposed to be in the general population.
In some ways it is a gift. I barely remember traumatic events, but unfortunately I dont really remember amazing events either.
Have you tried remembering how their presence felt/feels? Consciously identifying the feeling that a loved one "carried" was an important part of a recent grieving I went through.
I have the opposite of face blindness and subconsciously process every face but I have lethonomia (cannot remember people's names). Years ago, I was once riding my bicycle from campus at probably 21 mph / 30 kph and recognized the brother of a lab partner when they were completely to the side of me and 75' / 22 m away in profile after seeing a photo of them once. I'm probably not as good as I once was due to a TBI.
There are benefits. For example, I find that I have no issue forgiving people. It's more work for me to harbor a grudge. I don't relive the burden of that initial pain of betrayal when someone close to me harms me, so it's easy to forgive and literally forget.
Fun fact: My dreams are very rarely visual.
This is a rhetorical question... No need to answer for you situation but I wonder.
Sounds like functional forgiveness, as apposed to decision or emotional arc forgiveness. "Letting go" being a very strong default, that would require special maintenance to avoid doing.
I am this way in the long run. Regardless of the situation, at some point I just realize I completely don't care.
Once I know someone operates in a problematic way, I spend some time figuring out how they tick. People really do operate differently internally, and understanding the variety of cognitive damage that nature and nurture can inflict goes a long way to being able to be objective about people's shortcomings.
Then I use common sense to avoid any recurring problems, without negative feelings. I may not want to be connected with someone anymore, but if I run into them, or we are thrown together for some practical purpose, I can be amiable, without any conflicted feelings.
> How about the pain of reliving old memories? I could do with a little less of that right now.
I don't relive the past the way it seems most people do. I know what it's like to feel hurt or feel stuck but I don't generally feel emotions about things in my past. That's good because I've endured a lot of bad shit but also sucks because my wedding day is kind of like any other day to me, as was the birth of our kids. I guess I know all of the good and all of the bad things that have happened to me -- though I don't really carry them with me the way some people seem to, they're part of me but I don't spend much if any time ever thinking about them -- but I don't feel any particular way about any of it. I know that I love my wife and kids more than life itself, I know these facts and I know the timelines but there's not much else there. I know these things but there's no emotional weight to them.
Some people these days are hoping to combat aging and make potentially infinite life extension possible. I find that idea far more terrifying than death. Infinite lifetime would mean that experiences more emotionally and physically painful than I can even imagine would happen countless times. Slowly I would become so messed up by all the accumulated traumatic memories that I would no longer be able to function at all. I would only consent to an infinite or radically extended lifetime if I could also selectively erase memories I don’t want to keep.
And, then you might recognize that all of our personalities are constructed out of these scars, it's just that most of them we're not aware of and most of them aren't painful to think about. A time comes, when you notice that your association with a given negative memory becomes more neutral, there's a bit more distance between you and it.
I can say for myself that every experience I labeled as negative, I was haunted by, turned out to have a positive outcome at the end. There are hardships that "haunt" me now, and I don't know how it will have been a positive influence on me, but I believe that it will, and that helps.
I hope I don't come across as pushy with my viewpoints. I resonated deeply with what you said, and felt the need to share.
By the way, a practical tip, I find that if I prompt an LLM with something like:
> I'm going through [a difficult time]. Help me reflect. Ask a question or give me a prompt, I'll respond, and so on. Act like a friend.
That has been for me surprisingly effective for releasing debilitating emotional stress.
It's all a grayish blur with a tint of sun and green here and there and there are memories that I can recall almost as if I'm there, but this sentiment that big chunks of my life is totally lost I think is the same.
I've also come to terms with it. I write down once and again on my journal. I try to crowdsource memories from friends. But what ultimately makes this ok for me is the prospect of creating new memories and the faith that the crucial lessons from past experiences are embedded in me. And if not it's always an opportunity to relearn everything with more attention.
It's tiring but it can be very rewarding.
It isn’t something I’ve thought about too much. I’ve noticed that other people seem to remember events better, but it didn’t seem too remarkable. But the author’s presentation of this as anomalous really reframes it.
They do say that only half of people who have this also have aphantasia, so we’d expect plenty of people without aphantasia too.
Is the author sure about this? How do they know they learnt the lessons if they don't remember what happened?
The best way to convince most people of something is to tell a story about it. Ask a senior engineer how splitting up a monolith into microservices can go wrong and they'll have a dozen stories. Ask someone about the importance of clear communication and they have hundreds of stories of things going wrong. And when I want to convince someone, I deploy a story from my experience and it has a good chance of working.
I can tell someone my mental model, but also the evidence that went into the model from my experiences. Not having that second part is like publishing conclusions without publishing the data.
I understand it's fine for the author but it does seem like a real handicap. Dwelling on it is not going to be useful for the author, but actively handwaving this all away doesn't seem credible.
And on another note, when a loved one dies it is nice to think about them and remember things we did together.
> By doing away with reminiscences, flashbacks, and graphic visions of possible futures, I can stay focused on the now, and on what I can do now to improve tomorrow.
My graphic visions of past experiences and possible futures when someone says "let's do a complete rewrite of this business logic" are actually very useful for convincing people not to do that...
Good luck with the wild ride of parenthood!
I remember a lot. One oddity with me is I seem to remember an unusual amount when it is connected to a question. I seem to record for a while, then can play back.
And this sticks, sometimes for years until the question is resolved. Then a bunch of it fades and becomes like most other memories are.
I remember every year of school and a lot of related activities. Saturdays out playing, or first concert, that sort of thing.
So, why am I not fine?
Take 9/11
I remember the state before that day. We have come a long way since then.
Too far, if you ask me.
Cops in schools. There were no police in my schools. Kids made mistakes, teens demonstrated poor judgement, and other things..
They were treated like kids.. today??
They have records..
I worked for one company for too long. The culture shifted. Soon, I felt like the stranger. I held the history nobody else did, or if they did, they did not share.
Now, I do consider these mostly nice problems to have. I have options and can exercise them.
Thought you might appreciate some perspective.
I enjoyed this piece.
This is part of the classic debate around aphantasia – both sides assume the other side is speaking more metaphorically, while they're speaking literally. E.g., "Surely he doesn't mean he literally can't visualize things, he just means it's not as sharp for him." or "Surely they don't literally mean they can see it, they're just imagining the list of details/attributes and pretending to see it."
What I'm trying to say is that from his perspective, how he imagines people with more "normal" memory recall things, might be a bit exaggerated. He doesn't know what he's missing exactly so he might imagine it to be better than it really is. I'm not trying to say that everyone else is like me or that he's like me. Like if he can't imagine an apple in his mind at all and he hears other people can, he may imagine it's as clear as staring at an apple in real life or a picture of an apple on a computer screen, while the reality is somewhere in the middle. I do believe his claims about himself, but his claims about me or people like me don't seem entirely accurate.
I have these jarring social experiences where I encounter people who readily recognize me, refer to me by name, etc., and I have no idea who they are. Usually (although not always) they look vaguely familiar, so that I know I must have known them at some point, but they have essentially been erased from my mind. I cope with this by greeting them warmly and just faking it.
I am also absolutely terrible at remembering personal details from other people's lives, although I have great recall of scientific facts, figures and dates.
In general I feel like my past is about about three or four years long. I'm in my mid-forties and everything from before the pandemic feels like it happened a century ago. But I have no gauge on whether that is normal.
For me it also feels like pre-pandemic years were a lifetime ago, that life events around 2018/19 happened to someone else. But I don't think I have SDAM as I do have good recall for personal experiences, though it feels like it's getting weaker as I get older and the frequency of novel experiences wanes.
The other confounding factor is I moved to the opposite side of the world after completing my education, which meant a lot of those really foundational memories didn't get reinforced as much as they did for my peers. Because they got to hang out frequently and relive those tales together, while I felt them slipping away like sand from my fingers.
This is tricky, because the first couple people I think of are people who sort of "exist" in some sense online. Maybe I haven't seen them physically in 5-10 years, but I see their handle on a friends list or maybe I've messaged them in that time. I can remember things from back when I did see them in person, but perhaps their presence in some form since then has kept things more active. (Maybe they're more friends than acquaintances, admittedly it's hard for me to draw a line there without a clear definition)
I'm leaning toward "yes", though. I can remember old people who I fixed computers for once or twice and never really talked to again otherwise. They weren't related to me or anything, it was purely business, but I can remember things like them offering me a drink or asking certain questions or that they pronounced a word in an unusual way.
I believe this is the stuff people with aphantasia struggle with.
While its ok to have fictional memories for fun, I think this is disastrous for legal reasons.
Plus I do think memory recall is strong for a lot of people. Wanting retribution for harm done long back, or even life long trauma for bad things that happen to people early life is real.
So we know that at least the people who claim to see nothing act differently. Could it just be that people who act differently describe the sensation differently, you might ask?
No, because there are actual cases of acquired aphantasia after neurological damage. These people used to belong to the group that claimed to be able to imagine visual images, got sick, then sought medical help when they could no longer visualize. For me, at least, that's pretty cut and dry evidence that it's not just differing descriptions of the same (or similar) sensations.
There is no possible way that anyone could honestly describe this experience as "I don't visualize," any more than someone with working ears could describe their experience as "I don't hear anything."
I would describe this in terms of telling stories from childhood. Many people I know can spin a narrative around significant events from their childhood, as if they're living it again as they tell it. This is something media has taught me is the normal way of experiencing a memory. But for me, it's just a list of facts. I can tell you various bits about the time I got punched in the face as a child (second grade, his name, my telling him to "make me" before he did it, every teacher not believing I could have been partially at fault), but those are simply fact lookups in list form. Part of that is aphantasia sure, but the other part is the lack of an emotional memory. I don't remember how any of that made me feel, I can just assume based on context. If I felt anything other than what would have made the most sense in context, it's logged as a fact about the incident.
Sadly, that means I have very little actual memory of my childhood. It's mostly a list of incidents and some data points about the incidents. I don't have emotional core memories of my grandparents, just some events associated with them that I know happened, but can't relive.
Despite aphantasia, my autobiographical memory is a weird mixture of gaps and some very solid vignettes/moments where I remember a lot of detail. It's never a long-running scene. Many of these memories are pinned at some traumatic or surprising moment, but some seem to be much more mundane and yet somehow were recorded as if they were pivotal.
I have a pretty high ACE score. Ironically, some of my pivotal memories are meta-moments when I had a sudden veil lift from previously repressed memories. I'm remembering not the original traumatic moments, but the moment of realization that my memory had these decade-plus gaps or eras to it.
I, too, lack episodic memory for anything that wasn’t extremely emotional —- but have extremely strong semantic memory. As well as memory of specific occasions or patterns being linked to a spatial sense (which in turn relates to vague visuals —- colors and textures; spatial relationships; sometimes a very blurry visual snapshot or one with blank gaps in it; but not actual images).
This almost sounds similar to deaf rights activism that tries to prevent children from getting cochlear implants to me.
You never experienced what you are missing, you have no idea what you are missing.
I can, on demand, replay my most beautiful memories on loop. They are my most valuable treasure. Unless they are lost to dementia, I already know which memories I will replay before death.
Being able to visualize mental images is essential to experience the full range of what it means to be human.
I do wonder how drugs with strong visuals work on those people though? What do they see when they take ketamin or DMT?
I do feel like it's a major disadvantage. I often have to act the part when people remenisce about important shared experiences that I was involved with.
Luckily it does tend to only come rushing back when they tell me "Ah yes, it was in the mountain range with the red cabin", but that's usually past the point where I've already made a fool of myself
I noticed it specifically when talking to my wife about remembering feelings and emotions. I have a lack of empathy (different to sympathy) and when looking back at past events I struggle to feel the emotions I was feeling at the time. I can recreate them using facts and things I understand but it's different to experiencing the same feeling.
The author of the article doesn't touch on this so I'm curious to know if they have the same experience.
I bring this up for two reasons: I wonder how fluid this sort of thing is, and I wonder what factors can dial up and down the intensity. Nicotine, patches in particular, absolutely supercharged my dreams to be bright, vivid, insane, bizarre hallucinations.
In general, my memory of novel events / odd connections / hilariously specific details is quite good, going back many years. I can also forget what I’m supposed to be doing right now within minutes. I can often remember when/where/how I read/saw something but not WHAT I read, so I have to retrace my steps to get to where I know the information is that I’m seeking.
It all seems to oscillate and shift and it’s fascinating.
I remember some major work accomplishments but have some trouble selling myself. (A lot of time and effort was spent on solving problems somewhat artificially created by unique & unusual circumstances).
Same with remembering names. I never used to be able to. Then I realized that was just a shitty behavior and that people deserved to have their names remembered. Suddenly, once it had value and 'wasn't a thing I couldn't do' but 'something I want to do' I could remember names.
1. schizophrenia? (blind people never seem to be schizophrenic)
2. artistic skill
3. alzheimers and dementia
4. empathy - the ability to see yourself in other's shoesDo you really want to work for people like that?
This. Information retrieval typically happens based on an impulse. For many people the impulse can be a question like "what did you do yesterday?". But some people organise their memories differently. From reading the article it is clear that the author does not have a bad memory. Their memory is just wired/optimized differently. The biggest problem is other neurotypical people who, without bad intentions, assume that it is easy to answer a question, that is framed around time.
It's more like I "feel" I'm there though, and I know who was there, what items and such. I'm in my mid 40s, and could easily talk for several hours about when I was 4-6, for example, recalling events from that time.
Of course some are a bit more fuzzy than others, but most memories capture the salient points.
The weird thing is that if I see a name of someone I know, I don't picture them in my head, but if I see a face I've seen before, even briefly, I usually always recognize them. I'm terrible with names though.
Duuuuude that’s how I am. I can’t remember anything autobiographical without some trigger. But once I have the trigger, I remember the event whose memory was triggered. Vividly. But I don’t have the ability to tell you what happened yesterday without a reminder from somewhere. I can’t simply recall stuff a lot of the time. It drives people nuts.
This works for me too. Let’s say I run into someone I met once a couple months ago. Maybe I recognized them, but I might not remember their name, and certainly don’t remember what we talked about. As soon as I can get details about where in the city the venue was, or where we were sitting in the room, then it all comes back.
I don’t have aphantasia, just a sometimes frustratingly inadequate memory.
It's why if you forget something you were thinking or going to do, go back to where you were and do the thing that lead to that thought and often it will come back to you.
Aphantasia I think is different, because this type of thing you describe happens for all types of recall not just visual imagery.
Related : People with no internal monologue
I'm now playing around with visualizations just when I'm falling asleep, when I now notice I actually can do it. To me, seeing pictures in my head just feels very odd and kind of pointless.
What a blessing.
It really helped to write up why they don't matter now, such as "I was a child when that happened, I'm now an adult who knows how to handle that."
My brain thinks that a physical piece of paper is much more authoritative than a thought in my head and makes less effort to remember things that are documented so having twenty page booklet that I can get out if I need it seemed to help.
- My lack of memories of my late mother has left me with untold grief in a way the passing of my grandparents did not.
- Mental health is too focused on the individual and the variation in our behaviour should be viewed not only with regards to our own individual fitness but also the fitness of our group and our kin. Most things that are decried as disorders are understudied in group settings designed to maximise the positives. And I despise people overhyping ADHD etc etc as some sort of superpower.
Same goes for tragic and happy events: I can't remember their details, but I remember my emotions.
And just now in the process of writing all this, a quite recent example has come to mind, which may be the most recent, and it was when I was on walk and just crossed a corner when a car arrived at the corner to turn, and the male passenger already had their window down, and so he yelled out something like "cool beard", and the driver was female and didn't really pause turning or anything, and I didn't acknowledge the bloke at all (because fuck off, dont yell out at me from a car window). I'm not confident, but I think the car was a small-ish SUV. Anyway, apart from where it happened, I can't think of anything else. I don't know what clothes I was wearing, what they looked like (besides being ~30yo and white), what color their car was, what his voice sounded like, which direction they turned (it was a roundabout), etc.
* By probe my mind: in my case I am constantly "talking" in my head. It's as if someone is sitting over your shoulder going "uhh, you go to the shops often, maybe check that folder. nothing? uhh, what about ..." Eventually something will just pop-up. (I don't really say folder in my head, more like "maybe at the shops, maybe on the outside, maybe walking inside, whilst at the checkout? nothing? uhh..."
* By spring to mind: It's kind of like an email arrives in my inbox with all the details in it. All I can do is probe my mind a bit, then "check the inbox", then probe, etc. Whilst listening during conversation, events relevant to the conversation can just appear in the inbox. I don't know if the talkers words can trigger it, or if it's because my inner-voice is reviewing/breaking-down* what they are saying as they are saying it, and that's the trigger. This is also what happens when I am reading. Things can just appear whilst I am talking too, because my inner-voice is usually planning ahead in the conversation (and it also monitors tempo, audience response, etc), but I think it might be the same part of the brain that does speech, so it can only work at like half speed. Sometimes I will forget the word I was going to say or muddle a moment of speech, which is probably the inner-voice using too many resources. And of course, I can just "get distracted" and fork the convo at any moment (the classic "speaking of which"). My inner voice also plans ahead whilst I am writing, and it makes similar mistakes. Sometimes I will miss a word, or even just skip ahead a whole sentence (to the point where it was planning). It's particularly easy to "lose a sentence" if the word I'm typing is similar in letters to the one that's just been planned.
* Because my inner-voice is talking whilst they are talking, it can notice something interesting said in the conversation, or it could trigger an idea (I haven't pondered this before, but perhaps a 'new idea' notification just arrives in the inbox too...), and at the point my focus can drift as my mind explores that idea/topic (I think this is the ADHD "Predominately Inattentive" aspect at play).
* PS- Because I ponder so much, I have pondered something pretty "meta" before, like in the way that the universe could be a simulation. So yes, I have wondered if the voice in my head is me (it sounds like me), or if it's an entity that has "taken control of the wheel". On the rare occasion that it's not talking, I get the sense that it's still there, waiting. After a few moments there might be a "hmmm...".
Also my inner voice can do very accurate impressions, and sing just like the real singers it copies. There is a strange distinction between "singing lyrics" and "hearing a song with lyrics" in my head. It can even make sounds with my voice that are quite impressive, and I get the impression that it is possible for me to make those sounds. It tries for a moment to convince me to do it, before it chuckles and says "there's no way".
* PPS- As I was typing that last part, a memory popped up! I was at the strip club one time talking to a girl, and out the blue she goes "you've got a good voice, i reckon you would be a good singer", which made me think "fkn what". lol
* Update: I was just in the kitchen making a coffee, and thinking about how good this post was. A few things popped up; 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mj2fVcyVkU 2) https://hurlburt.faculty.unlv.edu/hurlburt-heavey-kelsey-201... — "The median inner speech frequency of the participants in the Heavey and Hurlburt (2008) and Mihelic (2010) studies was 20 percent." 3) On the last project I was on, I think the engineer I was working with ended up with PTSD from all my ideas, lol. But still, they all liked it when the reviews from construction came back as "this is the best ever!"
As I was gathering those links — 4) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5bJvo_THvg When people without inner voices watch a scene like that, I wonder what they think is happening. The TV show Peep Show is another example. Do they think the person is "first person" is actually saying those things? It would make no sense!
> There are many memories there, but most of them can't be retrieved with convenient keywords like "a time when X happened".
In a paragraph about "times when I couldn't recall specific episodes" and describing a job interview from the past.