This is an especially interesting read given that Huxley described his own apparent aphantasia - lack of mental visual imagery - in "The Doors of Perception":
I am and, for as long as I can remember, I have always been a poor visualizer. Words, even the pregnant words of poets, do not evoke pictures in my mind. No hypnagogic visions greet me on the verge of sleep. When I recall something, the memory does not present itself to me as a vividly seen event or object. By an effort of the will, I can evoke a not very vivid image of what happened yesterday afternoon, of how the Lungarno used to look before the bridges were destroyed, or the Bayswater Road when the only buses were green and tiny and drawn by aged horses at three and a half miles an hour. But such images have little substance and absolutely no autonomous life of their own. They stand to real, perceived objects in the same relation as Homer's ghosts stood to the men of flesh and blood, who came to visit them in the shades. Only when I have a high temperature do my mental images come to independent life. To those in whom the faculty of visualization is strong my inner world must seem curiously drab, limited, and uninteresting.
Because of the lack of inner images (I thought everyone had this) in retrospect I was particularly drawn to exploring altered states of consciousness watching my mind in awe creating the utmost realistic scenes (lucid dreaming in REM sleep) or completely lose myself in ever complex imagery even on mild doses of psychedelics.
So, I slowly learned to bypass my aphantasia by entering a trance state in a similar fashion as described here but through long meditations (>30mins).
Because I'm not distracted by mental images popping up, its only a function of slowly watching your thoughts pass by in complete blackness (normal for me). When talking to fellow meditators without aphantasia I feel it makes it easier for me (once I learned not to control those images) to enter those stages quicker and more reliably by taking a shortcut through the realm of visual blackness ;)
Since I don't know how it is to be able to conjure up mental images at will in the ordinary state of mind I tend to be more verbose and exact in describing my experiences to others who in turn can be more easily triggered by that - I suspect through the help of their mental images now popping up. I find it fascinating that I can literally evoke elaborate pictures in most people minds by just talking to them with attention to more detail (which I can only abstractly conceptualize).
Mental images in everyone are hazy and fuzzy and undetermined compared to what we perceive via sense perception.
I have doubts about the existence of aphantasia in the strict sense. While I can agree that different people indulge in greater or lesser day dreaming or imagination or pay greater or lesser attention to mental imagery or remember and recall images better or with greater precision than others, I don't think aphantasia as the total absence of images (where "image" is understood as a hazy sense impression) is real. I suspect that whose who claim to have this condition falsely believe that others have images that are of the same "resolution" and vividness of sense experience, but this is not the case, certainly not in most people.
That could be the case to a degree -- it's likely very hard to rule out simple miscommunication in general as a part of the equation here. But I have a friend who administered this test (to be spoken to its subject):
Close your eyes. Imagine a ball resting on a table. The ball begins to roll, quicker now, and it goes over the edge of the table. It bounces, once, twice, three times, and rolls along the floor, then comes to a stop again.
What color was the ball?
Did you have to make that detail up just now when I asked you, or was that what you saw?
This last question is the decider: a visual detail like that is very difficult to omit while _picturing_ the situation, but is very easy to leave out if your brain doesn't work that way. If you had to choose a color at the end, you may have the true "no picture at all" form of aphantasia, as opposed to just failing to understand that other people don't see a real, solid image.
This study had participants imagine a bright scene, which triggers a physiological pupil response similar to the response of actually walking out into the bright sun. Those who self-reported aphantasia had no physiological pupil response.
Aphantasia is not a "false belief", and I assure you that those with aphantasia find it just as hard to understand mental visual imagery as you find it hard to understand a lack of mental visual imagery.
Why do you doubt it? When you talk to someone with aphantasia, one of most people's first questions is something like "sometimes my mental images are pretty fleeting and indistinct, is that what you mean?" and they'll say "no, I don't even understand what 'mental image' means". It's possible they're all lying or very confused but it seems unlikely.
A friend with this condition also told me that growing up, people would often say "picture x in your mind" and he always assumed it was a figure of speech for "think about a description of x" because he couldn't imagine what else "picturing" could mean.
I suffered from panic attacks in my youth. Mindfulness meditative practice enabled me to breathe in a such a way that I could stop the panic attack in its tracks. I further extended this breathing pattern to enter a state of deep calm on command.
It drives my wife crazy, but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation. In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after.
Finally, I’m a religious person and prayer is a mechanism for me to communicate with God. Combining transcendental meditation with my communications with the higher power is a very mind blowing experience for me.
This sounds like spiritual bypass, which is a failure mode of mindfulness a lot of people can fall into. You say it drives your wife crazy, so it seems that being in this state doesn't actually help you resolve issues between you and your wife. It only numbs you to the conflict and puts the whole burden on your wife.
"It only numbs you to the conflict and puts the whole burden on your wife."
Or it prevents the conflict from escalating. Panic and anger are connected, so if he found a way to be calm and stop the conversation, I guess this is way better than having the conflict in a mode of distress.
So later, when both are calm, the issues can get resolved.
> You say it drives your wife crazy, so it seems that being in this state doesn't actually help you resolve issues between you and your wife. It only numbs you to the conflict and puts the whole burden on your wife.
I don't understand why you're saying this. The technique wasn't primarily to resolve issues with spouse; it was to fight panic attacks.
Please don't "you're doing it wrong" with mindfulness. Mindfulness has become almost a religion for some people who want it to be more than a pragmatic tool with various consumption styles.
The whole thing has been oversold in the same way that cannabis, etc. were. It's just a thing, utterly detached from artificial spiritual goals, and we should let people use it how they want.
This is textbook spiritual bypassing. You are misusing Buddhist teachings in order to run away from your life. Buddhism especially (but also related religions) is about facing the difficulty in your life as it is, not "blissing out for 30 minutes while you wife is talking to you"
I think you misread the comment and he doesn't do this to escape his wife. You should reflect on yourself to understand what mechanism makes you jump head on on a (illegitimate) patronizing opportunity.
I found a first edition copy of the Doors to Perception in a Newcastle, Australia used bookstore in ~2006-2008 for tens of Australian dollars. Not sure if it had any value, but I (naively I now realize) loaned it to my then-wife’s therapist who then stole it and lied by saying his dog ate it. I asked for the remainder. He again lied and said he already threw it away.
Joke is on him cos my now ex-wife had him dead to rights. He propositioned my then-wife multiple times and hired a former and later current female client he was in a relationship with as his secretary. (Just one person, not two different women.)
My then wife reported him and he lost his license to practice.
I consider his karmic debt still owes me a dogeared book lol
Huxley was a very persuasive writer, witty and engaging, with good insights. But I doubt that making an already unreliable pattern recognition apparatus go haywire can produce anything useful. Entertaining, maybe, useful, no.
You mean an experience which categorically compels individuals to be kinder, more gentle, and less selfish in pursuing genuinely altruistic ends is not useful? Often times as a result of (their ego) thinking they were going to die.
Readit News
Because I'm not distracted by mental images popping up, its only a function of slowly watching your thoughts pass by in complete blackness (normal for me). When talking to fellow meditators without aphantasia I feel it makes it easier for me (once I learned not to control those images) to enter those stages quicker and more reliably by taking a shortcut through the realm of visual blackness ;)
Since I don't know how it is to be able to conjure up mental images at will in the ordinary state of mind I tend to be more verbose and exact in describing my experiences to others who in turn can be more easily triggered by that - I suspect through the help of their mental images now popping up. I find it fascinating that I can literally evoke elaborate pictures in most people minds by just talking to them with attention to more detail (which I can only abstractly conceptualize).
I have doubts about the existence of aphantasia in the strict sense. While I can agree that different people indulge in greater or lesser day dreaming or imagination or pay greater or lesser attention to mental imagery or remember and recall images better or with greater precision than others, I don't think aphantasia as the total absence of images (where "image" is understood as a hazy sense impression) is real. I suspect that whose who claim to have this condition falsely believe that others have images that are of the same "resolution" and vividness of sense experience, but this is not the case, certainly not in most people.
Close your eyes. Imagine a ball resting on a table. The ball begins to roll, quicker now, and it goes over the edge of the table. It bounces, once, twice, three times, and rolls along the floor, then comes to a stop again.
What color was the ball?
Did you have to make that detail up just now when I asked you, or was that what you saw?
This last question is the decider: a visual detail like that is very difficult to omit while _picturing_ the situation, but is very easy to leave out if your brain doesn't work that way. If you had to choose a color at the end, you may have the true "no picture at all" form of aphantasia, as opposed to just failing to understand that other people don't see a real, solid image.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9018072/
This study had participants imagine a bright scene, which triggers a physiological pupil response similar to the response of actually walking out into the bright sun. Those who self-reported aphantasia had no physiological pupil response.
Aphantasia is not a "false belief", and I assure you that those with aphantasia find it just as hard to understand mental visual imagery as you find it hard to understand a lack of mental visual imagery.
A friend with this condition also told me that growing up, people would often say "picture x in your mind" and he always assumed it was a figure of speech for "think about a description of x" because he couldn't imagine what else "picturing" could mean.
Dead Comment
It drives my wife crazy, but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation. In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after.
Finally, I’m a religious person and prayer is a mechanism for me to communicate with God. Combining transcendental meditation with my communications with the higher power is a very mind blowing experience for me.
Or it prevents the conflict from escalating. Panic and anger are connected, so if he found a way to be calm and stop the conversation, I guess this is way better than having the conflict in a mode of distress. So later, when both are calm, the issues can get resolved.
I don't understand why you're saying this. The technique wasn't primarily to resolve issues with spouse; it was to fight panic attacks.
The whole thing has been oversold in the same way that cannabis, etc. were. It's just a thing, utterly detached from artificial spiritual goals, and we should let people use it how they want.
Joke is on him cos my now ex-wife had him dead to rights. He propositioned my then-wife multiple times and hired a former and later current female client he was in a relationship with as his secretary. (Just one person, not two different women.)
My then wife reported him and he lost his license to practice.
I consider his karmic debt still owes me a dogeared book lol
Entertaining, not really, useful, most certainly.
me spidey sense is tinglin again, if anyone is aware of more info surrounding this, please share