Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 03:17:55 UTC No. 16246713

To communicate with yourself is to think and if your brain cannot communicate with itself you cannot think. This is the basis for neurology and is why lobotomies were created to allow the brain to think in ways that are non-intrusive to itself, in mentally ill patients where overstimulation prevents them from thinking coherently. Most neurological drugs work the same way.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 03:27:18 UTC No. 16246731

>>16246713
Brain develops concepts, on top of prepacked senses and enviromental data

Breathing is natural and the brain can communicate it to itself even with no learned language

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 03:35:15 UTC No. 16246745

>>16246660
im really glad these people all decided to not have children.
absolutely gay terminology but a "neo-byzantium" seems more and more plausible the more I understand birth trends.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 04:00:42 UTC No. 16246788

>>16246660
For sure true, you have no chance once you get into uni level maths and beyond trying to speak things out in your head, you need to have already developed the capacity to work though stages of problems without talking to yourself. Internal monologue is far too slow.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 13:13:06 UTC No. 16247367

>As someone with no inner dialog, I can say this is absolutely true for me. I find it bizarre that most people have words in their heads all the time. And most people find it bizarre that I do not. The only time words come into my thoughts are when I am practicing for speech acts or writing. I am able to formulate language expressions but it is a directed effort. I have a job involving math and coding, and none of it involves verbal language for thinking.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 13:15:03 UTC No. 16247370

>>16246660
???
Would this not be a L for people who use an external monologue to compose their thoughts?

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 13:23:26 UTC No. 16247373

>>16246660
Social media have made it obvious that our use of language is evolving rapidly in a goal-oriented manner. This raises the question how we know what our goals / motivations for using language are in the first place if not by talking to ourselves.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 14:28:44 UTC No. 16247448

>>16246660
As soon as people heard "about half the population have no internal monologue" they immediately assumed inferiority, which is super weird. People without internal monologues think more abstractly and are better at abstract thought and concepts (i.e. math). Regardless, the world is about 50/50 with the split, and given that clearly there's not an obvious 50/50 split of people's behavior, thinking, etc, it has little effect on a person whether they have an internal dialog or not, so its pretty useless to debate what it means.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:30:45 UTC No. 16247540

>>16247448
>People without internal monologues think more abstractly and are better at abstract thought
Let's read that again:
>People without internal monologues think more abstractly and are better at abstract thought
One more time:
>People without internal monologues think more abstractly and are better at abstract thought
It's true that ChatGPT is way more knowledgable and better in writing essays, solving math problems and connecting the dots than I will ever be. Who cares that ChatGPT may not have an internal monologue? Imagine a world where 50% of ''people'' are ChatGPT!

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 16:20:03 UTC No. 16247629

>>16247540
Maybe you should keep reading it as many times as you need to come up with a thought that isn't completely retarded.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 16:59:42 UTC No. 16247697

>>16247448
Internal monologueing is dialectical behavioral therapy except inside your head. It's perfectly fine to have a dialect in your head to come to the truth and look at things more clearly. It helps people have better reality testing. Having better reality testing is clearly better and the only way to progress scientifically/

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 18:21:13 UTC No. 16247874

>>16247448
I have a strong internal monologue and I am good am math. Not a ultra-master next-eulur level, but good.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Jun 2024 19:20:53 UTC No. 16247973

>>16247448
as someone with an internal monologue, i've noticed, if i'm paying close attention to the process in my head, the thought the monologue expresses occurs AFTER the thought is already formed - it's essentially a translation layer, a process for "how would i communicate this idea?" that happens to also provide a means for dissecting the idea via its linguistic correlates after it has formed... but you can also do that with the base language-less "understanding" of the idea without a monologue. the only discernible difference, should one exist, would be in the speed and accuracy of communicating ideas - not having them in the first place.

people without an internal monologue who think themselves "superior" mistake the internal monologue for a "speed/depth of thought" limitation that doesn't really exist, and people with an internal monologue who think themselves "superior" mistake the internal monologue for a "self awareness" requirement that doesn't really exist.

it's analogous to horoscopes fighting each other.