A question on human mind, words and thinking

imdeafsowhat said:
in a boxing match, one could remember things when he was an infant, but only way to remember is to take some beatings.
Click to expand...

awkward thing to say but I get your point.
 
jillio said:
Can you explain it to me?
Click to expand...

it's an old sport wisdom but it was VERY awkward of him to use that in this baby example. Anyway - You as the boxer.... You're thoroughly schooled and trained... but you ain't gonna remember a damn thing at the ring against your opponent - the golden rules/principles/techniques/etc. But you'll remember it all well when you get smacked around at the ring.
 
jiro123 said:
it's an old sport wisdom but it was VERY awkward of him to use that in this baby example. Anyway - You as the boxer.... You're thoroughly schooled and trained... but you ain't gonna remember a damn thing at the ring against your opponent - the golden rules/principles/techniques/etc. But you'll remember it all well when you get smacked around at the ring.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Questionable, but interesting.
 
jillio said:
Ahh, but numeorus historical studies in cognitive psychology and neurology have determined the workings of the infant mind.
Click to expand...
That I believe. What I cant imagine is that someone especially older can remember how their brains were working as infants.
 
Yeah very interesting question Hermes. I've read some of your posts and I must say you are a thinker.
When I thought about it, it is very complex and makes u wonder. For myself, I remember being in my own little world where i was happy by myself, I have no idea what i was thinkin or how i thought without words but i knew what emotions were and responded as any human will.
 
I was born hearing and grew up hearing until I was about 20 or so. However, I'd always heard people talking about how everybody thinks in words, but I can honestly say that I never have thought in words. I would imagine such thought to be very restrictive. To use your first example, if I wanted to go somewhere, I would see very realistic images/videos in my mind of that place I wanted to go, and I would see myself doing things I wanted to do. I have a very big dictionary right next to me where I sit, and I've yet to find the words to describe many of my thoughts. When I want to go to the store to buy certain groceries, my mind doesn't print out a grocery list. I see 3D images of the items I want to buy. I often don't even know what those items are called, but I know what they look like. My mind doesn't contain a verbal description of them, but a fluid video image of them, looking at them from all angles. I have images in my mind of my route through the store to get to where I might find it. I can even see myself walking the isles pushing the cart. I don't think "Turn right when you reach the beverage isle" or any such thing. To me, I would think such thoughts would be too cumbersome to sort through. I would have constant pages and pages of text scrolling past my minds eye every moment. I would be very interested in learning how one who thinks in words copes with the enormous volume of information that would have to be presented to your conscious mind in the form of words sufficient to understand and navigate the world. I don't mean to turn this discussion around. If somebody feels like making a topic about it, it should probably be created in a new thread
icon7.gif
 
SimplyMints said:
To me, I would think such thoughts would be too cumbersome to sort through. I would have constant pages and pages of text scrolling past my minds eye every moment. I would be very interested in learning how one who thinks in words copes with the enormous volume of information that would have to be presented to your conscious mind in the form of words sufficient to understand and navigate the world.
Click to expand...

You are asking the "how one thinks in words" using the words. Of course you are doing it because you are writing here. But if you were alone and you were going to wonder it by yourself, how were you going to ask same question in your mind with images?

Images might work in basic daily activities, but I am curious about how thinking in images work when it comes to philosophical thinking. When you read a book the ideas are delivered to you through words. If you disagree with author after reading it, do you produce contrary ideas in your mind using words or images?

-
 
Hermes said:
You are asking the "how one thinks in words" using the words. Of course you are doing it because you are writing here. But if you were alone and you were going to wonder it by yourself, how were you going to ask same question in your mind with images?

Images might work in basic daily activities, but I am curious about how thinking in images work when it comes to philosophical thinking. When you read a book the ideas are delivered to you through words. If you disagree with author after reading it, do you produce contrary ideas in your mind using words or images?

-
Click to expand...

Of course I'm writing in words. I have no other way to deliver this information. The idea didn't spring from a dictionary in my mind. Only my means of communicating the idea came from my mental lexicon. I believe in my post I described exactly how that question would be asked in my mind. I have an image of a vast amount of text scrolling across the minds eye and the image of the person viewing the text becoming overwhelmed. Perhaps the analogy of pictures is insufficient because it makes you think of literal pictures. It's sort of a 3D motion picture. I have a perspective, but I can think of it from another angle if I choose to. The mere fact that I communicate using words doesn't mean the ideas in my mind are formed from words. On the contrary, the words are sought by my conscious mind with but one purpose, and that is to attempt to convert ideas that already exist into a form that can be communicated to another person.

As for your question about reading a book, in order to understand the book, my mind must convert the words from the book into ideas, which it attempts to do automatically. I think it's worth pointing out that at times, the words can be difficult to make sense out of, which means that they don't easily convert to ideas. If once the ideas are acquired I then decide they are contrary to my beliefs, my ideas (or "images") are then the clash between my ideas and the ideas I interpreted from the words in the book, with particular focus on the elements that contradict. If I then want to present my disagreement to another person, I must then assemble my argument into words, which at times takes much longer to attempt than it does to simply know why I disagree.

In my opinion, the more complex and detailed the thought is, the more critical it is that it must be borne out of ideas (which we keep referring to as images or pictures, but as I described before are more of a 3D representation of the physical objects and occurrences involved). The words are formed for the purpose of communicating with others. I don't need to communicate with myself because I already have the idea, and therefore I don't often assemble words to describe ideas that I keep to myself.
 
SimplyMints said:
Of course I'm writing in words. I have no other way to deliver this information. The idea didn't spring from a dictionary in my mind. Only my means of communicating the idea came from my mental lexicon.
Click to expand...

If you were thinking in words the ideas wouldnt be springing from a dictionary in your mind either. Thoughts in form of words would just appear in your mind. Mind acts like a super fast computer at this point. I read what you are saying, Mind compares it with millions of other information it contains and decide if what you are saying is logical or not (logical is subjective here, the way one's logic is formed may not be same with another person) . It happens in less than a second. Because once I finish reading your answer, I already know if I agree or disagree with you without using words. Words only appear in my mind like an inner voice, if I make a comment about something you say to myself. If I agree, then perhaps I think you are a smart person. At that point I use words for making that comment about you in my mind.


In my opinion, the more complex and detailed the thought is, the more critical it is that it must be borne out of ideas (which we keep referring to as images or pictures, but as I described before are more of a 3D representation of the physical objects and occurrences involved). The words are formed for the purpose of communicating with others. I don't need to communicate with myself because I already have the idea, and therefore I don't often assemble words to describe ideas that I keep to myself.
Click to expand...


So can you help me understand it better. I will give you a paragraph from a book. Can you give me a visual description of how you internalize this text from a book.

"My success as a man of science, whatever this may have amounted to, has been determined, as far as I can judge, by complex and diversified mental
qualities and conditions. Of these, the most important have been--the love
of science--unbounded patience in long reflecting over any subject--
industry in observing and collecting facts--and a fair share of invention
as well as of common sense. With such moderate abilities as I possess, it
is truly surprising that I should have influenced to a considerable extent
the belief of scientific men on some important points."

Autobiography (1881); "The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin", Vol. 1.
page 107.

I might think Darwin is a humble man after reading this paragraph . I would store this idea in my mind in form of words. If somebody asked me according to Darwin how his success as a science man determined, the answer " by complex and diversified mental qualities and conditions" would appear in form of words in my mind.

I understand how you can visualize humble (I am sure it will have a different image in everybody's mind) and create the idea "Darwin humble" by that. But I cant visualize how you might store in your mind the quote I gave above in form of images. Dealing with this line "by complex and diversified mental qualities and conditions" in my mind without using words is very difficult for me. But I am hoping it will become more clear once you describe it further.

Thanks
Hermes
 
Words are symbols. Other things can be used in that symbolic capacity. It does not have to be a word. Thoughts in our brain are symbolic reconstructions of something else. Words are not a neccessity for symbolic recreation. Only some form of language is necessary.
 
Hermes said:
If you were thinking in words the ideas wouldnt be springing from a dictionary in your mind either. Thoughts in form of words would just appear in your mind. Mind acts like a super fast computer at this point. I read what you are saying, Mind compares it with millions of other information it contains and decide if what you are saying is logical or not (logical is subjective here, the way one's logic is formed may not be same with another person) . It happens in less than a second. Because once I finish reading your answer, I already know if I agree or disagree with you without using words. Words only appear in my mind like an inner voice, if I make a comment about something you say to myself. If I agree, then perhaps I think you are a smart person. At that point I use words for making that comment about you in my mind.





So can you help me understand it better. I will give you a paragraph from a book. Can you give me a visual description of how you internalize this text from a book.

"My success as a man of science, whatever this may have amounted to, has been determined, as far as I can judge, by complex and diversified mental
qualities and conditions. Of these, the most important have been--the love
of science--unbounded patience in long reflecting over any subject--
industry in observing and collecting facts--and a fair share of invention
as well as of common sense. With such moderate abilities as I possess, it
is truly surprising that I should have influenced to a considerable extent
the belief of scientific men on some important points."

Autobiography (1881); "The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin", Vol. 1.
page 107.

I might think Darwin is a humble man after reading this paragraph . I would store this idea in my mind in form of words. If somebody asked me according to Darwin how his success as a science man determined, the answer " by complex and diversified mental qualities and conditions" would appear in form of words in my mind.

I understand how you can visualize humble (I am sure it will have a different image in everybody's mind) and create the idea "Darwin humble" by that. But I cant visualize how you might store in your mind the quote I gave above in form of images. Dealing with this line "by complex and diversified mental qualities and conditions" in my mind without using words is very difficult for me. But I am hoping it will become more clear once you describe it further.

Thanks
Hermes
Click to expand...

I'll try to give you an idea how I think my mind does it, but please keep in mind that this isn't a consious effort on my part, that my mind does it without me trying. To me, it's completely natural, and to do any different would take a great deal of effort if it is even possible. It may be that this is the way my brain learned to interpret the world, and that every brain learns to do this in its own unique way.

If I'm trying to recall or memorise a specific quote, naturally I'll interpret the quote and form the idea of its meaning, but the specific words also become objects to be stored in my memory, and in that way, I can recall and reproduce those exact words.

As to how I would visualise them, how I would see them as a complex idea? This becomes difficult to explain. The idea is clearly in my mind, but what this demands of me is that I read this statement and understand it. At this point, the idea is established and is sitting there in my head for me to ponder. Now, I must take this idea and convert it back into words in order to tell you what it's like to have this idea in my head without the words it was given to me in. I have no way other than words to convey the idea, and so I may not be as clear as I hope to be when I tell you about it.

You're referred specifically to the phrase, "complex and diversified mental qualities and conditions." I'll try to focus on that phrase to TRY to describe how this concept would be visualised in my mind. Basically, I'd probably have two of these animated 3D images floating around, both of Darwin's mind. They aren't physical brains, but they are objects within my mind which can't exist in the physical world, so I'm now finding them impossible to describe in words designed to describe the physical world. Therefore, for the purpose of continuing my description, let's say these "minds" are represented by a series of neural pathways. Now, it's reasonable that I would have such a visualisation since that's the way I understand the inner workings of the physical human brain, a vast complex network of neurons all communicating with each other through electrical impulses. One would probably have been formed when I heard the word "qualities" and therefore would take on a form that would complement the way I interpret the word "quality" (for example, durable, having built-in redundancies, accountable, made of superior materials). This object would contain characteristics of complexity and variation. If I focussed on the complexity and variation, my mind would elaborate on the details of the object by drawing upon other images I have in my mind with regard to Darwin and the things he has done and what I've learned about him in the past, including possibly unmerited ideas I'd formed about him. The other object would be one that focuses on conditions. This is probably a separate object because it has to be formed in multiple dimensions beyond the spatial dimensions my analogy uses. This is so that it can be represented in my mind under multiple conditions. My brain seems to distinguish various unstated conditions by altering the colour of the surrounding space, and perhaps by making minimal alterations to the object (Darwin's mind) in each "condition" (coloured space). The complexity of the "condition" is represented by multiple colours being used in the same space. The diversity is represented by the number of "conditions" imposed upon Darwin's mind. If I focus more closely on these conditions, my mind would draw upon the various things I've learned or assumed Darwin has done, and where he has gone (or where I thought he'd gone) as a representation of increasingly specific conditions Darwin's mind might have been subjected to. I would probably be looking for conditions (or circumstances) that would present themselves as complex and diverse in effecting Darwin's mind.

At this point, I feel like I should remind you that this is a single idea, an object. I need only to see it in the blink of my mind's eye to see this detail. There isn't much detail in this analogy, but it took a lot of words to describe it because of my attempts to describe what the specific idea is like in my mind without words, and yet being confined to use words in my description.

But again, the quote itself, if I were meant to reproduce it, is an object of its own, and therefore is in the form of individual words in all their complexities. In this case, I'm preserving specific detail about a speech pattern. My mind puts together a lot of smaller objects to represent specific words (from which I can access what my mind believes the meanings of these words to be, and these meanings would be in the form of ideas, and definitely not a dictionary definition) in a string.

I hope this made at least a little sense. :giggle:

When I was younger, I know my mind worked a little differently than it does now. For example, instead of a single object representing a complex concept, it would create an organised array of smaller ideas, probably because I hadn't yet developed the natural ability to understand complex concepts, and so I had to try to understand complex situations in my world using the only tools my mind had at the time, as limited as they were. Ideas no longer appear in my mind as arrays or any combined organised structure. If I'm thinking of the concept of an organised structure, that structure would be an array, or a repeating pattern of some kind, but it would be a concept of its own, and not a combination of multiple concepts.

Um, I'm gonna stop for now. Even the simplest of human minds has complexities that could fill all the books in the world to describe, so hopefully the sample I've provided answers your question. If not, perhaps we can try again sometime, LOL!
 
jillio said:
Words are symbols. Other things can be used in that symbolic capacity. It does not have to be a word. Thoughts in our brain are symbolic reconstructions of something else. Words are not a neccessity for symbolic recreation. Only some form of language is necessary.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, depending upon how loose the definition of "language" is. But I think the brain actually tends to form its own language out of the things observed in the world from birth. Of course, this language could never be used to communicate with others unless we were telepathic, so it doesn't perfectly qualify according to the dictionary, but it is a language in a sense that a computer programming language is, even if that language is specifically written for a single computer to read from its own hard drive.

I also think that individual words aren't always stored as individual concepts, but it can at times be that phrases or parts of speech can also be stored as individual concepts in some people, obviously varying between every person. This might account for miss-spellings of multiple-word concepts. A common simple example would be "a lot" (a lot of people say "alot" because in their mind, it's a single word). I believe these concepts constantly change throughout every person's lifetime. If you say the word "butterfly" today, I would probably picture a butterfly (as opposed to a cube of butter with a black fly crawling around on it), but it would probably not be the exact same butterfly as if you said the word again tomorrow.

:laugh2:
 
SimplyMints said:
Yes, I agree, depending upon how loose the definition of "language" is. But I think the brain actually tends to form its own language out of the things observed in the world from birth. Of course, this language could never be used to communicate with others unless we were telepathic, so it doesn't perfectly qualify according to the dictionary, but it is a language in a sense that a computer programming language is, even if that language is specifically written for a single computer to read from its own hard drive.

I also think that individual words aren't always stored as individual concepts, but it can at times be that phrases or parts of speech can also be stored as individual concepts in some people, obviously varying between every person. This might account for miss-spellings of multiple-word concepts. A common simple example would be "a lot" (a lot of people say "alot" because in their mind, it's a single word). I believe these concepts constantly change throughout every person's lifetime. If you say the word "butterfly" today, I would probably picture a butterfly (as opposed to a cube of butter with a black fly crawling around on it), but it would probably not be the exact same butterfly as if you said the word again tomorrow.

:laugh2:
Click to expand...

I agree. The brain can also use the language of emotion, in which it recreates a feeling from a memory of a situation. It can recreate a memory of a situation from the experience of a familiar smell. None of this is dependent upon words.
 
jillio said:
I agree. The brain can also use the language of emotion, in which it recreates a feeling from a memory of a situation. It can recreate a memory of a situation from the experience of a familiar smell. None of this is dependent upon words.
Click to expand...

I agree.

Um, I don't think I have an essay for this one
24.gif
 
jillio said:
Words are symbols. Other things can be used in that symbolic capacity. It does not have to be a word. Thoughts in our brain are symbolic reconstructions of something else. Words are not a neccessity for symbolic recreation. Only some form of language is necessary.
Click to expand...

I am not really sure about brain processes words and symbols same way. I dont think words are visual symbols in hearing people's minds. Lets try it together. Can you hear your voice in your head? Well not exactly your voice but I am sure you know what I mean. Now repeat the word beautiful. You do not see the letters "b" "e" "a" etc... We do not visualize the words as symbols. As you repeat it, you will hear it in your mind, like you are saying it to yourself but without using your actual voice. So please say it in your head, beautiful, beautiful..

Now lets say a rose symbolizes beautiful for you. Think of a rose , project the image of rose in your mind. But dont think the word "rose".. We are using the image of it now. Repeat it couple times. Every time you want to say beautiful to yourself imagine the rose.

Now can you tell me the first and the second experiments are exactly the same ?

Not to me. Yes every word represent something and a picture could take their place. But since I can hear, the spoken language is the first thing my brain starts recording as a baby with no effort. I , as I am conditioned to use spoken language in my mind, dont know how it would be otherwise. I am not sure its as easy as replacing words with pictures-symbols though. Specially what SimplyMints described.

She was more describing a situation, thoughts were appearing in her mind in a sense of motion picture. If I understood her correctly, she was not talking about different pictures as symbols come to mind one after another for creating an image-language. I find it interesting.

-
 
SimplyMints said:
I'll try to give you an idea how I think my mind does it, but please keep in mind that this isn't a consious effort on my part, that my mind does it without me trying. To me, it's completely natural, and to do any different would take a great deal of effort if it is even possible. It may be that this is the way my brain learned to interpret the world, and that every brain learns to do this in its own unique way.
Click to expand...

Trying to do what you told us is requiring a great deal of effort on my part :) but I hope I am getting a sense of it.

I have got two more questions. How come, you think, your brain learned to do this while spoken languages were the first thing you were exposed (I would assume) as a baby since you have heard first 20 years of your life. Were there any special conditions present ?

And my second question is, using the method you described, does your mind chatters time to time by itself during the day? If it does I am sure you know what I mean. If it doesnt, then tell me and I will give examples.

Thanks for taking time and writing a lengthily explanation. If there is anything you would like to ask , I will do my best to answer them too.

Hermes
 
Hermes said:
I am not really sure about brain processes words and symbols same way. I dont think words are visual symbols in hearing people's minds. Lets try it together. Can you hear your voice in your head? Well not exactly your voice but I am sure you know what I mean. Now repeat the word beautiful. You do not see the letters "b" "e" "a" etc... We do not visualize the words as symbols. As you repeat it, you will hear it in your mind, like you are saying it to yourself but without using your actual voice. So please say it in your head, beautiful, beautiful..

Now lets say a rose symbolizes beautiful for you. Think of a rose , project the image of rose in your mind. But dont think the word "rose".. We are using the image of it now. Repeat it couple times. Every time you want to say beautiful to yourself imagine the rose.

Now can you tell me the first and the second experiments are exactly the same ?

Not to me. Yes every word represent something and a picture could take their place. But since I can hear, the spoken language is the first thing my brain starts recording as a baby with no effort. I , as I am conditioned to use spoken language in my mind, dont know how it would be otherwise. I am not sure its as easy as replacing words with pictures-symbols though. Specially what SimplyMints described.

She was more describing a situation, thoughts were appearing in her mind in a sense of motion picture. If I understood her correctly, she was not talking about different pictures as symbols come to mind one after another for creating an image-language. I find it interesting.

-
Click to expand...

About "beautiful" -- that's actually made of my mind's concept of what beauty is to me, which is another one of those concepts that can't be described in terms of the physical world. I neither hear the word while thinking of the concept, nor do I see it printed or comprised of the letters it's spelled with.

A thought just occurred to me. I wonder if this is due to the fact that I was raised in an environment where I was exposed to several different languages equally, and my brain developed this way of thinking in order to cope with differentiating between these languages without one of them becoming "primary." By the way, by the time I was in 3rd grade, English became my one and only language, but though my vocabulary was still growing and my mind was learning to understand more complex concepts, these new concepts have never begun to take the form of the words used to describe them in speech or written form. That would seem to indicate that I only know the word and not its meaning, and I'm not saying I've memorised the definition from the dictionary, but I mean fully understand and internalise the meaning of the concept.

Let me give you an example. Since my brain can have multiple concepts that would be connected to a single word, here's one of those. If I were wandering some region I've never been before and happened across a pony, a real one, perhaps behind a fence I was walking by, I'd go up to the fence and look at the animal. There is no sign anywhere, and no people to ask what it is. But if I wanted to say what that was, I would say, "That's a pony." However, if somebody said to me the word "pony" without context, my first thought would be of the concept of a character from Hasbro's My Little Pony. I often make the conscious decision to switch to the other (real) "pony" concept because odds are, this person who said this word to me isn't thinking about My Little Pony.

By the way, these two concepts which go by the same name are in my mind completely separate and unrelated. Rainbow Dash has very little in common with the pony living in the pasture across the road from my house. It's as though in one's world, the other doesn't exist.
 
Hermes said:
Trying to do what you told us is requiring a great deal of effort on my part :) but I hope I am getting a sense of it.

I have got two more questions. How come, you think, your brain learned to do this while spoken languages were the first thing you were exposed (I would assume) as a baby since you have heard first 20 years of your life. Were there any special conditions present ?

And my second question is, using the method you described, does your mind chatters time to time by itself during the day? If it does I am sure you know what I mean. If it doesnt, then tell me and I will give examples.

Thanks for taking time and writing a lengthily explanation. If there is anything you would like to ask , I will do my best to answer them too.

Hermes
Click to expand...

I'm not completely sure what you mean by "chatters" ....... I think my mind is always active when I'm awake, thinking about all sorts of possibilities, what I might do next, what I would do if I could but can't, what somebody else might be doing or thinking, etc. Let me know if I'm off on this.
 
Back
Top