Warrigal comments on Rationality Quotes June 2013 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: Thomas 03 June 2013 03:08AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (778)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 10 June 2013 11:46:39AM 0 points [-]

Do you actually hear the voice? I often have words in my head when I think about things, but there isn't really an auditory component. It's just words in a more abstract form.

Comment author: [deleted] 11 June 2013 02:54:45AM *  3 points [-]

I wouldn't say I literally hear the voice; I can easily distinguish it from sounds I'm actually hearing. But the experience is definitely auditory, at least some of the time; I could tell you whether the voice is male or female, what accent they're speaking in (usually my own), how high or low the voice is, and so on.

I definitely also have non-auditory thoughts as well. Sometimes they're visual, sometimes they're spatial, and sometimes they don't seem to have any sensory-like component at all. (For what it's worth, visual and spatial thoughts are essential to the way I think about math.)

Comment author: syllogism 11 June 2013 04:41:44AM 1 point [-]

If you want to poke at this a bit, one way could be to test what sort of interferences disrupt different activities for you, compared to a friend.

I'm thinking of the bit in "Surely you're joking" where Feynman finds that he can't talk and maintain a mental counter at the same time, while a friend of his can -- because his friend's mental counter is visual.

Comment author: Baughn 21 January 2014 05:30:33PM 0 points [-]

Neat. I can do it both ways... actually, I can name at least four different ways of counting:

  • "Raw" counting, without any sensory component; really just a sense of magnitude. Seems to be a floating-point, with a really small number of bits; I usually lose track of the exact number by, oh, six.

  • Verbally. Interferes with talking, as you'd expect.

  • Visually, using actual 2/3D models of whatever I'm counting. No interference, but a strict upper limit, and interferes with seeing - well, usually the other way around. The upper limit still seems to be five-six picture elements, but I can arrange them in various ways to count higher; binary, for starters, but also geometrically or.. various ways.

  • Visually, using pictures of decimal numbers. That interferes with speaking when updating the number, but otherwise sticks around without any active maintenance, at least so long as I have my eyes closed. I'm still limited to five-six digits, though... either decimal or hexadecimal works. I could probably figure out a more efficient encoding if I worked at it.