/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23074458]

How do people with the No.5 brain read fiction?
Any anons here wanna enlighten me?

[Anonymous No.23074463]

>>23074458
Enjoy the prose I guess, that's about it.

[Anonymous No.23074469]

>>23074458
>How do people with the No.5 brain read fiction?
They don't. At least they colored him accurately.

[Anonymous No.23074471]

>>23074458
These are the pretentious speed readers that won't stop flipping pages in front of my fucking face. They pretend they internalized everything but I fucking doubt it. Once watched a woman read Hamlet in about an hour. Never have I been more disgusted than at that moment.

[Anonymous No.23074478]

>>23074458
I thought everyone is no. 1, but the imagery lasts a second or 2 and then takes a 2-3 second gap to reappear.

[Anonymous No.23074562]

>>23074458
No one has a 5 brain ffs, hell, not even the rest, that's not how the brain works, this is made up bullshit; some people may have a harder time summoning mental images and keeping them stable, but that's about it

[Anonymous No.23074570]

>>23074458

Is 1 saying that you see an image like some kind of augmented reality?

[Anonymous No.23074581]

>>23074458
They’re subhuman NPCs and prefer movies over books. Also some of them post on this board.

[Anonymous No.23074582]

>>23074471
>These are the pretentious speed readers that won't stop flipping pages in front of my fucking face. They pretend they internalized everything but I fucking doubt it. Once watched a woman read Hamlet in about an hour. Never have I been more disgusted than at that moment.

[Anonymous No.23074584]

>>23074570
>Is 1 saying that you see an image like some kind of augmented reality?
Yes, it's called an "imagination".

[Anonymous No.23074602]

>>23074458
Yeah I'm there. Didn't really understand that I was missing a whole lot when reading, I still enjoy it just that I tend to want to skip ahead if the author is really taking their time describing a scene in great detail. Guess that's not really what people do.

[Anonymous No.23074613]

>>23074458
I never see images when reading , I just try to get the meaning

[Anonymous No.23074622]

>>23074613
What books do you read?

[Anonymous No.23074628]

>>23074458

Imagine reading books as a 1. Total pleb tier just go watch tv. You will never truely understand a book unless you are a 5.
The literal only thing you have is the words so you are very focused on the words. A 5 with a strong internal monologue is the absolute peak human form for reading.

[Anonymous No.23074640]

>>23074622
Been reading Correction by Bernhard lately

[Anonymous No.23074644]

>>23074582
>speedreader is a wojakposter
Of course

[Anonymous No.23074670]

>>23074562
>t. coping NPC

[Anonymous No.23074677]

>>23074463
This. I'm a 5, I love Joyce, Pynch, Melville, Gaddis, McElroy, the list goes on. Aphantasia doesn't affect my comprehension or retention as far as I can ascertain. Being unable to put a face to characters or to visualize the scenes being described is tragic though.

[Anonymous No.23074777]

>>23074677
So, how do you recall the story/event and think about them later if you can't imagine them? What goes on in your head during that time? The prose?

[Anonymous No.23074827]

>>23074777
>How do you recall the story
Does your memory work like a television recap? I just remember the story, verbally or conceptually.
>What goes on in your head
I interpret the story. Spatially complex paragraphs like in Moby Dick when Ishmael describes the rigging parse fine. Its just not visual.

[Anonymous No.23074832]

>>23074562
No, they literally cannot see anything at all. That's what aphantasia is.
I can see still images but I can't keep them stable.
When I read, I see animated scenes playing out in my head. But they're not super detailed.

[Anonymous No.23074846]

>>23074827
>Does your memory work like a television recap?
More like a simulation. It rebuilds the images and scenes in my head, and maybe spontaneously add some modifications depending on my mood and other relevant information I may have come across since then.

[Anonymous No.23074857]

>>23074458
They pick up the book and read it.

[Anonymous No.23074871]

>>23074846
I'm quite skeptical if people who can visualise normally actually retain more information in their memories. However the mind stores an episode of experience, it must encode and compress it somehow. To recall a memory both the aphantasiac and normal person can retrieve whatever has been stored but the normal person can additionally translate the compressed memory into a synthetic experience.

[Anonymous No.23074876]

>>23074458
Is this picture really bait or theres actually people that's not 1, 2 or 3?

[Anonymous No.23074881]

>>23074458
I can render an entire apple farm in my head.

why can't a basic person not be able to see a single imagine in their head?

[Anonymous No.23074898]

>>23074458
I can only imagine things I have actually seen before. So if someone is describing a church for instance, I will envisage a church I have actually seen (whether it be in reality or on television - but usually a church I've actually seen / been in).
Yes it is embarrassing to admit this, but I haven't read a lot up until recently so hopefully it'll improve over time but I don't have high hopes.

[Anonymous No.23074922]

>>23074458
>be me
>5
It's over

[Anonymous No.23074938]

novels are made for number 5 brains because they cant conceptualise anything without explicit instructions, number 1 brains do not read novels

[Anonymous No.23074944]

Literally nobody sits there and visualizes an entire novel anyways. I end up just making my own pictures a lot of the time because there are so many obscure words used for naming various things and describing environments, I can’t keep up and I’m not constantly looking it up so I just fill in the blanks. I wish I had an example right now but authors will use words all the time that you never even heard of to describe some subtle ass detail.

[Anonymous No.23074946]

>>23074458
I would assume non fiction is even harder because it has vastly less imagery to even offer on a theoretical level. At least fiction is technically a guided storybook.

[Anonymous No.23074987]

>>23074946
Aphantasia is being unable to visualise, not being unable to think. The aphantasiac and normal person's reading experience is more similar for non-fiction than for fiction.

[Anonymous No.23074995]

I can remember stuff from books I read over a decade ago as images, it's like remembering a dream.

[Anonymous No.23075012]

>>23074987
Visualizing is thinking. We build conceptual buildings in our minds, something that grounds information we feed into it.

[Anonymous No.23075113]

>>23074562
I think most people don't understand how this works. No one can evoke an image that is as clear cut and stable as the images you perceive when you open your eyes. It's more like the ghost of that image, but with all its attributes (color, texture, lighting, background, composition, movement, etc.). So yeah, level 5 visualization is real.
I pity people who can't visualize while they read. What a boring life it must be.

[Anonymous No.23075116]

>>23074944
>Literally nobody sits there and visualizes an entire novel anyways
I personally visualize each and every line, so wrong.

[Euronymous No.23075118]

>>23074628
>can’t think about 2 things at once

[Anonymous No.23075122]

>>23075113
>level 5 visualization is real
*Level 1

[Anonymous No.23075127]

>>23074628
Holy cope

[Anonymous No.23075371]

>>23075113
It's not boring. The reason why many people are bad at math is because they can't think abstractly. They require complete visualisations to guide them through concepts. Me, a person at level 5, has every one of my thoughts as an abstract. I literally can grapple with new ideas instantly and push the boundaries of what's possible whereas others struggle to comprehend it unless they have someone holding their hand.

[Anonymous No.23075376]

>>23075113
Best way I can describe it is that it's like remembering dreams.

[Anonymous No.23075390]

>>23074458
Very carefully.

[Anonymous No.23075900]

>>23075012
That sounds like an impediment to reasoning.

[Anonymous No.23077016]

>>23074463
>da prose

[Anonymous No.23077031]

>>23074876
There are people who pretend to be for attention

[Anonymous No.23077058]

>>23075113
I always imagine apples as low poly vidya models for some reason, but I can imagine other things just fine.
I am also terrible with face details, I cannot remember eye color of pelople I know to save myself.

[Anonymous No.23077064]

>>23075371
Thats not why people are bad a math

[Anonymous No.23077074]

>>23075371
What kind of fucking math are you studying where visualization isn't key?

[Anonymous No.23077078]

>>23077074
Oh no you both suck

[Anonymous No.23077085]

>>23074581
>trying to redefine what the NPC meme means
Nobody trusts your mainstream media anymore, get over it already.

[Anonymous No.23077088]

>>23074458
You can become aware of situations without picturing them. When you speak, you can recall whole events without manifesting the visual image of those events in your mind. It's more abstract. It does seem like it would be way less impactful though, when I recall books I've read often the most memorable things are the visual scenes I constructed while reading.

[Anonymous No.23077093]

>>23075113
Almost like Decaying Sense, huh?

[Anonymous No.23077332]

>>23074458
Are these supposed to b static? I used to be like 3 but after a couple years of nonstop reading, I have moved to 2. Also, idk if 5 exists...at least among the reading population.

[Anonymous No.23077342]

>>23074458
I've got 1 brain autism and it's the reason why I love McCarthy so much because he sharts out so much detail I can see explicitly the old weathered truckbeds and the Mexican prison and the Rio Grande that John Grady Cole would also see

[Anonymous No.23077363]

>>23074469
>They don't.
>>23074478
>I thought everyone is no. 1,
>>23074562
>No one has a 5 brain ffs
>>23074876
>Is this picture really bait or theres actually people that's not 1, 2 or 3?
>>23074881
>why can't a basic person not be able to see a single imagine in their head?
>>23074944
>Literally nobody sits there and visualizes an entire novel anyways
>>23075012
>Visualizing is thinking
>>23075113
>No one can evoke an image that is as clear cut and stable
>>23077031
>There are people who pretend to be for attention
>>23077332
>Also, idk if 5 exists...at least among the reading population.

What's really shocking is how many people assume that everyone thinks just like they do and can't imagine anything different.

[Anonymous No.23077488]

>>23077363
>No one can evoke an image that is as clear cut and stable as the images you perceive when you open your eyes
This is true, no matter how you put it.

[Anonymous No.23077519]

It took literally 50 years of the internet before anybody even realised this was a thing. It’s clearly a useless ability being able to visualise as half the people weren’t even able to and nobody noticed.

[Anonymous No.23077658]

>>23074458
They watch the tv adaptation.

[Anonymous No.23077661]

>>23074458
5s are the only ones able to perceive pure literature without the interference of visualization

[Anonymous No.23078012]

>>23074562
Any books on this?

[Anonymous No.23078074]

>>23074628
im a 1 with a strong internal monologue what are you gonna do about it.

[Anonymous No.23078098]

>>23077661
pure compare to what.
>author use words to describe things
>see those things in your mind
seems like being a 5 is more pure in the sense that you get less superfluous stuff but in the case of fiction i dont think visualization is superfluous.

[Anonymous No.23078105]

>>23077519
As a 5 with no sense of direction, I can tell you it's not useless. Thank god for google maps.

[Anonymous No.23078151]

>>23077488
I mean you can, it's called a hallucination and it's usually related to some really bad mental condition, ask the people of /x/ lel

[Anonymous No.23078160]

do you guys like drawing when reading? I never seem tog et around to drawing everything I want to but I feel like its required to visualize some things

[Anonymous No.23078166]

>>23077085
>can't think, can't visualize, doesn't have an inner monologue
As good as an NPC

[Anonymous No.23078217]

>>23078105
Youre just bad at directions. Being a 5 has downsides though. There are deceased people who Id like to experience a memory of as vividly as 1s describe their visualisations. Drawing and other representational art is more difficult.

[Anonymous No.23078277]

Besides visualizing, are you able to imagine/recall other senses? I can play out conversations or songs in my head just fine, but I have a bit of trouble conjuring smells and digital sensations. It's the same in my dreams. Barely any smells or feeling of pain/temperature.
I do get heavy nostalgia daily when I come across some smells, for example the smell of the discarded ice in fish markets remind me of some cold mornings of my childhood.

[Anonymous No.23078285]

>>23078160
I get the urge sometimes, but I'm not great at drawing.

[Anonymous No.23078310]

>>23074562
I can see letters numbers and basic shapes but can't summon anything else. Why are you so upset about this? Its not even that uncommon. As to OP, why do you think I need to visually imagine what's happening like a movie to enjoy it? Like the other low phantasia/aphantasia posters I prefer cool prose but I also read schlocky bullshit, it's not like I don't understand narrative because I can't imagine their faces? Do you just get weepy when an author writes "the view of the landscape was beautiful" and fill it in in your mind? I can access beauty from beautiful prose just like you.

[Anonymous No.23078314]

>>23078217
>>23078105
hey 5 posters, do you guys watch porn? If not, do you think your sex drive is lower/what you jerk off to in your head is more narrative based than other people?

[Anonymous No.23078320]

>>23077074
not that guy but what the fuck are you talking about?
>>23075371
fellow 5, I have a PhD in math, I wonder if we're on average better at it?

[Anonymous No.23078349]

>>23078314
Yes. My sex drive isn't lower. I never self-insert into porn though.

[Anonymous No.23078360]

>>23074458
So they read a scene and can't imagine it playing out? What the fuck.

[Anonymous No.23078361]

>>23078314
I dont watch porn I think about fucking random women I see IRL

[Anonymous No.23078383]

>>23075371
Ape-brain cope, you can simply not visualize when doing math.

[Anonymous No.23078391]

>>23078383
Visualising math becomes a major hindrance as soon as you go beyond the highschool level, and even before that is superfluous.

[Anonymous No.23078497]

>>23078098
Where do the images in your mind come from? Not from the author. If the author writes "he had brown hair", you visualize a composite of everyone you've ever seen who has brown hair.
Without visualizing, you can perceive the true, unaltered information of the text without visual bias.

[Anonymous No.23078698]

>>23078391
Yes, no one "needs" to visualize for math. Even if your brain works properly and you are capable of visualizing for other things the habit gets trained out of you for mathematics as you practice and go past single digit addition. ANYONE can learn how to cut out the visualizing middle man. So people acting like aphantasia gives you a special superpower here is retarded.

[Anonymous No.23078823]

>>23077661
John Green is a 5. Do you think he's able to make the purest prose in the human language?

[Anonymous No.23078976]

>>23078383
If that's the case then why do so many non-5s struggle to comprehend life as a 5?

[Anonymous No.23078988]

>>23077074
Pi is an irrational number. Do you literally need to see all infinite digits to understand the concept? This is basic stuff. Math gets abstract around beginner algebra and it only increases in intensity.

[Anonymous No.23079024]

>>23078976
Because the ability to visualize is trivial and easy to none-5's, it's trained since childhood when they picture their parents bedtime stories. So they will never 100% understand the perspective of someone who cant. The same in reverse goes for 5's, they will never completely understand what it's like being able to think in a way they are unable to.

[Anonymous No.23079025]

>>23074944
filtered

[Anonymous No.23079126]

>>23078151
>it's called a hallucination
The substantiality of a hallucination has more to do with the person's inability to differentiate the perceived world from the inner workings of their mind than with its actual vividness.

[Anonymous No.23079182]

>>23079126
I'm not sure, when I took LSD, the hallucinations were extremely vivid, but I knew that they were not real because they were extraordinary and seemed to defy logic, whereas some of my dreams are very vague but they're usually down-to-earth. Sometimes I'm having a hard time telling if a past event an actual memory or just a dream that I had.

[Anonymous No.23079199]

>the people who cannot imagine a rotating red apple with water droplets on it can vote and teach your children in public schools
This is actually very scary to think about

[Anonymous No.23079204]

>>23078320
Calculus and functions? You don't imagine those? Geometry? Algebra with vectorial spaces and subspaces? Vectors in general?
>>23078988
Knowing the number pi is hardly what I would consider studying math.

[Anonymous No.23079435]

>>23079024
>So they will never 100% understand the perspective of someone who cant. The same in reverse goes for 5's, they will never completely understand what it's like being able to think in a way they are unable to.


>How would you feel if you couldn't feel how you'd have felt if you didn't have breakfast this morning?
>But I do understand how I would feel if I hadn't had breakfast this morning.
>Yes but how would you feel if you couldn't feel that?
>I don't understand the question.

[Anonymous No.23079628]

>>23079204
Yeah I guess, but it's not strictly visual. I don't know how to explain it. You, however, asked "what kind of math are you not visualizing", which is most of it. Are you visualizing an N dimensional space? If you're just using your visual intuition about 3d spaces when thinking about Nd or even say, some pathological topology, you're probably going to be hamstrung instead of assisted by such visual intuition. More importantly, for more advanced math I think this just breaks down completely. I have never bothered to visualize or sketch any high dimensional function spaces. Even college level math like Galois theory, sure you draw trees and it's neat to be able to visualize group relations like that without having to draw them on paper, but how else would visualizing enhance understanding of Galois groups?

[Anonymous No.23079639]

>>23079199
You should see who we let be District Attorney and indict a president. Bitch got her dress on backwards.

[Anonymous No.23079650]

>>23074458
I not only can imagine the apple but can make myself feel the apple being touched and played with by someone, like my consciousness is transmitted to some time and place where that is happening. What do I make of that?

[Anonymous No.23079651]

>>23078823
Imagine failing high school logic and still feeling like you should be posting on /lit/

[Anonymous No.23079672]

>>23079650
You're The Giver.

[Anonymous No.23079714]

>>23074458
Nobody is like that. Consciously, sure they lack the mental firepower to visualize. But everyone can visualize as it’s the only way you form your associations for the images and ideas in your memory. Being able to consciously access this is another thing. So when these people read stories they are still visualizing them, just in a way that is not conscious to them. They couldn’t follow the story otherwise.

[Anonymous No.23079716]

>>23079650
You're a dreaming god. When you die so does your universe. Eat your fruits and vegetables, anon.

[Anonymous No.23079734]

>>23079714
retard

[Anonymous No.23079769]

>Oὐδέποτε νοεῖ ἄνευ φαντάσματος ἡ ψυχή
therefore, 5s are soulless

[Anonymous No.23079805]

>>23075371
Math doesn't use abstract thinking, all it uses is logical reasoning.

Abstract thinking = the ability to consider concepts beyond what we observe physically (Ex: pattern recognition, idea synthesis, viewing through other's lenses etc)

Logical reasoning = the ability to plan out and execute a certain notion or idea (Ex : 1+1 = 2)

[Anonymous No.23079857]

>>23079435
How would you see the world if you didn't have down syndrome?

[Anonymous No.23079863]

>>23079857
it's "down's syndrome", you fucking retard

[Anonymous No.23079870]

>>23079863
How would you see the world if you didn't have down syndrome?

[Anonymous No.23080020]

>>23079805
t. someone who knows nothing about mathematics

[Anonymous No.23080332]

>>23078217
>Youre just bad at directions.
Probably. But I've heard some of the 1s say that they have rotating minimap in their heads.

[Anonymous No.23080361]

>>23075371
People with low imagening have been empirically shown to be worse at anticipating new situations. Might explain some things about mathematicians.

[Anonymous No.23080405]

>>23080361
What's so bad about that? I think of a quote about this guy, who was wounded 11 times in battle. "He has that unshakeable bravery that comes from a lack of imagination."

Personally I think EXACTLY that lack of imagination is why this trait is stable and only a bit less rare than left handedness. Like left-handedness, it gives an increase in fitness, but only if it's a low occurrence phenotype. It probably benefits (by increasing bravery maybe?) individual fitness and the downsides are mitigated by sociality and free-riding on group imagination.

[Anonymous No.23080977]

>>23074458
When I was a kid my mom had me read Ben Carson's autobiographies Think Big and Gifted Hands a lot. I don't remember it much now because I was like 6-8 years old but in it he talks about how he couldn't envision anything in his mind for a long time as a kid while reading and that's why he didn't like reading. Until eventually I think his mom just forced him to read books until he eventually could. I don't remember the specifics, just that he couldn't imagine a scene like a blue mouse running across a barnyard floor or something to that effect.

Now that I'm reminiscing on this... he also talked about how he used to go train surfing which was where you apparently ride on the top of the train, which i thought was cool as a kid and I also kinda didn't even believe for a while, but it's apparently a real thing kids used to do back in the day. I think one of his friends died doing it Until one of his friends died doing it I think.
I just looked it up and it looks like it's making a comeback thanks to tiktok. Cool

[Anonymous No.23081140]

>>23074478
Also never sure if you can conjure a original picture or if every image you imagine is just a memory or synthesis of memories.

Like how can you picture a foctional story if you have no reference. Does it even natter, because you would probably just be able to imagine according to your imperic expirience. Like you could read russian 19th century literature and your mind just fills the charakter as british aristocracy, when you grew up in britain and never seen russian 19th century portraits.

[Anonymous No.23081456]

>>23074458
im so fucking surprised the conversation revolves around 1s and 5s. its almost like yr little gay chart is gay

[Anonymous No.23081485]

I'm 2 but I don't imagine shit when I'm reading. Visualization is a terrible idea to apply to a largely abstract medium. Books aren't movies, they're about internal states and levels of consciousness beyond material realm. If you just play it like an anime in your head you missed the point

[Anonymous No.23081578]

I don't think this gay shit is real at all and its a total artiface constructed to further distract and divide people from throwing bath tubs filled with C4 through the windows of those responsible for running the world.

[Anonymous No.23081663]

>>23081578
>Can't turn visualized objects into tangible explosives within the chest cavities of world leaders.
NGMI

[Anonymous No.23081706]

>>23074458
They don't. They make threads about how fiction is for dummies.

[Anonymous No.23082031]

>>23081578
Why would we do that? too many innocent men would get hurt in the crossfire if we tried to take out women that way.

[Anonymous No.23083120]

>>23079204
> Knowing the number pi is hardly what I would consider studying math.

The original post I was responding to:
> What kind of fucking math are you studying where visualization isn't key?

My post:
> Pi is an irrational number. Do you literally need to see all infinite digits to understand the concept? This is basic stuff.

Yes, I said it was basic. I answer his question with a simple concept that proves visualisation isn't required for maths.

You've also proved my original post of:
> Others struggle to comprehend unless they have someone holding their hand.

I never said that knowing the concept of Pi was studying math. However if you thought about my point for even ten seconds you might have taken it to its logical conclusion without someone having to do it for you.

[Anonymous No.23083420]

>>23081706
He who's denied grapes say they are sour.
I think not having a language to your inner monologue is even more interesting. Wonder what it's like?

[Anonymous No.23083466]

>question
Can any 5s in the thread tell me if you can dream?

[Anonymous No.23083681]

>>23083466
yes, it's usually more narrative and only very ethereally "visual", as in the way it feels for me to remember things I've seen. Aphantasia seems to be at least in part about having weakened/inhibited connections between your visual cortex and other parts of your brain, so I guess I still have some of the ability to "visualize", only it's so weak I never do it in waking life and never got good at doing it outside of the context of remembering things I've seen, and even then it's just a flash of an outline or something like that. If I try I can hold letters and numbers stable.

[Anonymous No.23083718]

>>23083120
>taken it to its logical conclusion
There is no logical conclusion, visualization isn't key to pi of fucking course, I am talking about the logical concepts. I though it was implied but clearly not for (you) for some reason.

You also failed to notice in the same post I replied to you I replied to another anon and went into specifics as to what parts of math I am referring to, something you ignored out of what I can only assume is dishonesty.

>Proves it isn't required
We are talking about efficiency, not requirement, once again your own larp as a smart lad outs you as a retard.
I don't care if you can learn pi faster, it's absolutely irrelevant to the discussion we are having because this doesn't necessarily mean you will understand calculus easier without being able to visualize functions without having to draw them every time.

[Anonymous No.23083729]

>>23079628
I guess you can say some concepts are not strictly visual but I don't see how being 1 would slow you down. I can still think about concepts without imagining them.

Also I'd add that physics and engineering, while not really pure math, definetly require visualization to truly understand what you are doing/proposing, so it being a huge help in many fields cannot be discarded