Comment by D-Machine | Hacker News Reader

Comment by D-Machine | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> I've also wondered whether this entire conversation is just all of us collectively talking past each other for the entire conversation and we all in fact have quite similar experiences

This is fairly conclusively disproven by far more than just fMRI / brain-imaging studies. E.g. aphantasics have problem with visual memory recall, visual priming, pupil dilatory and skin conductance responses when imagining light and/or fearful stimuli, and many other results (especially acquired aphantasia) that don't depend on brain imaging and obviously rule out semantic explanations. Likewise, rejecting the reality of the phenomenon also seems to require believing an extraordinary amount of error and/or conspiracy on the part of highly educated and insightful people that explicitly are saying the issue is not one of semantics / description. This is also not to mention the rich history of visualization practices in much of the worlds religions and esoteric practices (which make basically zero sense if this is all metaphor). See e.g. the discussion in a previous HN thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49464414).

> I invite you to feed your own friendly AI these references then ask it to analyze the recent papers [...]

Likewise, an unbiased AI prompt (or two prompts in separate sessions, with opposite biases) will clearly reveal the "semantics denialist" case has very little to stand on here. Yes, there are communication and linguistic issues, but these only cover a subset of ambiguous cases. Rejecting or denying the reality of aphantasia is an extremely strong indicator you are aphantasic, to some considerable degree.

It's possible, but "aphantasia is fairly rare" and "aphastastics abound on HN, even moreso than is apparent if there's a number of people like jerf who are aphantastic and still unaware despite even posting on stories about it" is a bit of an odd combination that I'm struggling with. Yes, I am well aware of the bias that only certain people post, as well as the distinct possibility that there are underlying correlations that could lead to our industry abounding in them. Though prior to this I would have thought quite the opposite given the association between visual processing and success in STEM and engineering.

One easy answer up there with "more study is needed" in terms of being a bit cliche, but cliche because it's often true, is that there may be a richer spectrum or something that isn't even 1-dimensional then we're currently able to grasp, which will become more clear over time and more study. Perhaps it's less rare than we think and the rareness is only those we can talk into agreeing their qualia really is different from others. Or the way we are describing it leads people in the "1-2 out of 5" category to declare themselves aphantastic on HN when they aren't really properly so.

> Yes, I am well aware of the bias that only certain people post, as well as the distinct possibility that there are underlying correlations that could lead to our industry abounding in them. Though prior to this I would have thought quite the opposite given the association between visual processing and success in STEM and engineering.

I agree this is an annoying confound, and also that it feels highly intuitive that being able to consciously visualize ought to correlate with better visuospatial (and thus much mathematical) cognitive ability.

I think the solution is recognizing that the reason cognitive deficits are mostly unobserved (visual memory recall studies aside) is recognizing that aphantasia is almost certainly a conscious access problem, i.e. most aphantasics are still using imagery too, just unawares. Last I checked, this is the leading hypothesis / explanation.

Also, plasticity and the ingenuity of the brain is clearly such that an aphantasic can also find other ways (e.g. other sensory modality imagery, pure logical relations, etc) of representing the problems that seem like they should rely on visualization. It seems obvious to me that these other ways can be both advantageous/disadvantageous, depending on the situation / phenomenon.

I don't think that it is that the industry abounds with us, but it is natural that those of us who have strong opinions on aphantasia and/or feel affected are far more likely to post on stories about it.

That a larger proportion of HN users are aware of their aphantasia is another matter - the renewed research over the last 10 years got a lot of attention.

It is very clear that there is a spectrum - hence why the typical test goes from seeing nothing at all via various degrees of seeing blurry or monochrome shapes to full colour vision. Going by Ed Catmull's survey of staff at Pixar, you will also find it extending further into hyperphantasia: People (and there's at least one in this thread too) who can "watch movies" in their head and can rewind and fast forward.

> Or the way we are describing it leads people in the "1-2 out of 5" category to declare themselves aphantastic on HN when they aren't really properly so.

People at the lowest end of the scale absolutely have aphantasia, but there's no "official threshold".

but also, if I could see even the vague outlines that'd place me one level up, it'd be very obviously different to my experience. I score the minimum possible 32 on the VVIQ2 test:

https://davidfmarks.net/vividness-of-visual-imagery-question...

And the minimum 16 on the older VVIQ test.

https://aphantasia.com/study/vviq

The median score on VVIQ2 is 79. The median for VVIQ is around 60, and the thresholds used for aphantasia on the VVIQ test is 24 or 33 depending on who you ask.

I can very occasionally possibly see brief flashes of vague imagery, and as I've mentioned elsewhere, I have had a single experience of what was probably at hyperphantasia levels, so I don't think there's some inherent physical limitation preventing me from seeing more. But it is also very clear to me especially because of that experience that I do in fact not see more.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com