Unable to load image

Do you have an internal monologue? And have you accepted that you're a subhuman r-slur if you don't?

I know this is a popular r*ddit topic, but I'm curious if rdrama bussy conniseurs overwhelmingly have an internal monologue. Despite being tards, the average user here is definitely less tarded than the average r*dditor. The vast majority of people I've seen online claiming they have no internal monologue are foids, which makes sense tbh.

60
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't think that people without the ability to print words into their conscious demesne

The poll question is a joke. Everyone has an internal monologue. Language is a necessary component of human thought. Language is the fundamental method of abstraction through which we build a mental model of our observed world.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Language is the fundamental method of abstraction through which we build a mental model of our observed world.

the kinesthetic sense would like a word

edit: I don't disagree that the poll question is, eh, well, it demonstrates the failure of language rather directly, doesn't it?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I would consider that would be a feeling, not a thought. Thoughts are necessarily structured abstractions of observed reality, i.e. the structuring of a feeling or a set of feelings. Thought flows from feeling, and in turn can incite more feeling. This is the premise of "mindfulness".

I suppose that's where the disconnect exists between our comments.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

but now extend the 'language' of feeling across the logical, the imperative, the contemplative, the symbolic dreamscape, and (I hope) come to understand that these are the true arenas of the life of the mind.

Words are just the social game.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

now extend the 'language' of feeling

There is no "language of feeling" within the model I'm describing. The act of

across the logical, the imperative, the contemplative, the symbolic dreamscape

This is word fluff.

(I hope) come to understand that these are the true arenas of the life of the mind.

Spare me your condescension. I'm describing a different school of thought within theory of mind.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

ah, but tres terrible, there is only one reality proper, eh?

A model is self-confessedly of your own creation, da? Models are imitations of the things they are meant to represent.

This is word fluff.

You decline to introspect? I assure you I meant specific things with each of them. One moment...

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

ah, but tres terrible, there is only one reality proper, eh?

Are you familiar with standpoint theory? I do not consider my approach to be the "correct" one. Is there an objectively correct interpretation of any given piece of art?

A model is self-confessedly of your own creation, da? Models are imitations of the things they are meant to represent.

Neurology is still in its infancy. Discussions on theory of mind are akin to the pondering of "gentlemen scientists" of the very early modern period.

You decline to introspect? I assure you I meant specific things with each of them.

It seemed like an overlapping, somewhat arbitrary listing of adjectives. What is the definitive distinction between "logical" and "imperative"? Imperative is a description of tonation and intent.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I do not consider my approach to be the "correct" one. Is there an objectively correct interpretation of any given piece of art?

yes. a painting of a guy is not a rock. Interpreting it as a rock would be wrong.

β€œIn its infancy” no u. I can know things

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I can know things

So can literally everybody else.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

More comments

no difference at all

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

no categorical difference whatsoever. psychology is fake lmao. what’s the difference?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

what's the difference

The difference exists somewhere in this subject.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

feeling vs thought is not about language. both have words for them. animals do both. what

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Feeling is hunger, physical touch, fight or flight, physical attraction. Animals experience these without language. Animals have no capacity for self-reflection and do not recognize feelings as feelings because their feelings are their comprehensive reality.

Humans are capable of abstracting and distinguishing these feelings as separate concepts. By abstracting the concept of hunger as an impulse instead of raw reality, we are able to recognize that hunger itself does not mean we need to eat. I believe animals can "fast" due to their condition, such as injuries, but I've yet to see an animal spontaneously fast in the same way a human will fast religiously.

TBH, you're not wrong. To me it just seems like you're approaching the subject differently than me. This comment is my attempt to provide some basis for what I'm talking about.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.