Thinking in Pictures

[speed]

I want everyone to ask themselves how they think. When you are remembering something, or thinking of anything really, do you form a image or picture in your head? Do you remember a image or picture of a prior event or person? Do you visualize numbers if say you are doing math? Do you visualize colors or other images when listening to music?

I personally think entirely in pictures or images. But, I am curious if this is universal? I thought it was, but upon questioning a number of people, I found most were oblivious to how they thought. Now of course this could be related to the fact most Americans are frightful uncultured bores who do as little thinking about non practical things as possible.

 

[Lord SteveO]

I'd say i use picture in my mind to remember things. Or at least visualise them when i'm thinking about them. Just like how if i read a novel and i visualise the scene in the book to help me understand or enjoy it.
Likewise, if i'm trying to work something out i may try to visualise it also. I don;t think it's a concious discision to do so, it just happens depending on the person. Maybe more creative minds find it easier to visualise a piece of info rather than remember raw information.

 

[Justin S.]

Speed, did you get around to reading Wittgenstein's Tractatus? One of his major points is the picture theory of thought.

 

[speed]

Speed, did you get around to reading Wittgenstein's Tractatus? One of his major points is the picture theory of thought.

No, I really should get around to tackling it. However, he covered it pretty well in his Philosophical Investigations.

 

[derek]

Yup, Theres been endless studies on this, anyone remember those "Improve your memory!" audio tapes the home shopping channels are always trying to sell? They were based on a picture theory of thought.

As far as i am concerned we do tend to think in pictures, rather than words.

 

[MURAI]

I paint and draw and all that but I cant visualise events like photographs from the past easily. It seems blurry. But, I can clearly remember past emotions and thoughts because I am always wrapped up in thoughts and emotions. Yes, I think of colors and images on my own when I listen to music or when I am reading.

 

[no country for old wainds]

I am always wrapped up in thoughts

this is yet to be seen, unpurai

 

[ARC150]

For those who say they think in pictures (which, I think, is everyone who has responded): Does this include ideas and concepts that move away from object-reality?

I think most people can picture a triangle if asked to think about a three sided figure; but what do you picture if asked to think about a 10,000 sided figure?

Picture a line that begins at point A and ends at point B. Now picture a line that begins at point A and extends infinitely.

Picture nothing.

***

In response to this, one might argue that they are still thinking in images, even if those images are not an accurate representation of the subject matter.

But what about the trains of thought that are rooted in ideas that defy visualization?

God is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent.

Is there an image of God? If so, is there a visualizatioin of being all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving? Is there an image for these things, or are we thinking in imageless concepts?

 

[speed]

For those who say they think in pictures (which, I think, is everyone who has responded): Does this include ideas and concepts that move away from object-reality?

I think most people can picture a triangle if asked to think about a three sided figure; but what do you picture if asked to think about a 10,000 sided figure?

Picture a line that begins at point A and ends at point B. Now picture a line that begins at point A and extends infinitely.

Picture nothing.

***

In response to this, one might argue that they are still thinking in images, even if those images are not an accurate representation of the subject matter.

But what about the trains of thought that are rooted in ideas that defy visualization?

God is omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent.

Is there an image of God? If so, is there a visualizatioin of being all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving? Is there an image for these things, or are we thinking in imageless concepts?

That is a interesting argument. I suppose my retort, is that such ideas that are so immense or obscure etc, remain that way until someone can properly visualize some way to deal with them. Physics I think is the perfect analogy. Ideas in quantum physics, string theory, and so on, have been understood now they have been broken down into things people can picture or conceptualize--like Schrodingers Cat.

I am obviously hypothesizing on this myself.

Before I forget, I think the GOd image is very interesting. I would say most of us have a personal image of GOd--even if we dont believe in God. I think if there actually was a God, it would be a totally matterless ethereal being. Ive seen God pictured as a being of supernal light; as a bearded old man; as a woman.

 

[AsModEe]

I don't think in pictures. One thing on the subject I've noticed is this; I am a native Swedish speaker, but think in English a lot of the time, especially trying to figure out emotionally difficult problems. I think it helps my mind to somehow distance itself from the subject being worked on so I can be more rational and less emotional about it, because English for me is foreign, although I am fluent in the language, and so it doesn't feel as "close" as thinking about the same thing in Swedish words would be. It's kinda weird, I can't fully explain this.

I'm experiencing the exact same thing, but replace swedish by french.

 

[10293847]

The short and simple answer for me is: It depends.

 

[Demiurge]

I think picture-thinking is initially useful, but must become conceptual-thinking. I'm very tired and will try to come back to this.

 

[Alwin]

this is what i am thinking of right now

 

[speed]

I actually just read this book called Blink by Malcolm Gladwell--its been much talked about-and in the book it is mentioned that thinking in concepts and pictures takes place on one side of the brain, and turning these thoughts into words takes place in the other side. I cant remember which one is left or right. But apparently it is incredibly rare for the two to coincide with each other. Most people think in pictures and concepts first, then words.

 

[derek]

^I agree, I tend to lean towards the notion that we think in pictures and concepts and then translate these into words best we can.

Perhaps when the two coincide thats when we have our Mozarts or Einsteins?

 

[speed]

^I agree, I tend to lean towards the notion that we think in pictures and concepts and then translate these into words best we can.

Perhaps when the two coincide thats when we have our Mozarts or Einsteins?

Or the Shakespeares, Leonardo's, Picasso's, Dostoevsky's, Nabokov's. I actually read somewhere that Nabokov, and a very famous recent artist saw words and things in colors; different words or things had different colors. And i believe the researchers claimed a number of writers, poets, artists, etc in the past, had the same talent. Now that is interesting, and quite an advantage. This has a scientific term too.

 

[derek]

^Yes, that would make it seem that folks are biologically predetermined to have the potential for genius. It's quite an interesting idea, but the power of the mind is quite substantial, so perhaps its possible to help the two sides communicate through learning, reading, expanding the mind? No?

 

[speed]

^Yes, that would make it seem that folks are biologically predetermined to have the potential for genius. It's quite an interesting idea, but the power of the mind is quite substantial, so perhaps its possible to help the two sides communicate through learning, reading, expanding the mind? No?

I'm sure science will figure it out what makes genius in the next twenty years. I grew up and went to school with two guys that are certified geniuses. The one, who was my best friend until college, had a 165 IQ, and the other's was even higher. I actually was in the same gifted classes up till high school when I went to a Jesuit High school ( believe it or not). Anyway, both of these IQ rated geniuses have never had to do much school work; they just get it. However, they are not all that creative. They may be rated geniuses, but they will never be the ones to figure out the next big theory or breakthrough--although they would probably understand it. Point is, IQ and intelligence in the sense it is tested now, just doesnt seem to spot who the true geniuses are. Maybe it is some strange wiring of the brain, or the way they see things in color? I dont know. But it is interesting.

 

[Freanan]

I agree with the last post. The thing that's measured by iq-tests is just pattern-recognition. That might be an important tool for doing actually intelligent things, but there is much more to it imo, like creativity, the fitting mindset (no use if you are intelligent but have some strange emotional fear of math and get a blackout every time you see a formula) and others (i am not mentioning learnable things like education here).

 

[speed]

I agree with the last post. The thing that's measured by iq-tests is just pattern-recognition. That might be an important tool for doing actually intelligent things, but there is much more to it imo, like creativity, the fitting mindset (no use if you are intelligent but have some strange emotional fear of math and get a blackout every time you see a formula) and others (i am not mentioning learnable things like education here).

Haha, Ive heard of people in college that get exemptions in math due to said mathmatical psychological disorder. Which is entirely unfair!

I do think the IQ test is a telling indication how well one will do in school or in a structured systematic environment.