Aphantasia: Experiencing Imagination Differently
Aphantasia, the inability to voluntarily produce visual images in one’s mind, is an intriguing phenomenon that many are still unaware they experience. While the majority of people can easily conjure up vivid images, people with aphantasia often think in more abstract or conceptual ways. It’s not about lacking imagination; it’s about experiencing imagination differently. The Ball on a Table experiment offers an enlightening peek into these contrasting inner worlds.
The Ball on a Table Experiment
Credit to u/Caaaarrrl for this experiment.
Visualize (picture, imagine, whatever you want to call it) a ball on a table. Now, imagine someone walks up to the table and gives the ball a push. What happens to the ball?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Answer these questions:
What color was the ball?
What gender was the person that pushed the ball?
What did they look like?
What size is the ball? Like a marble, or a baseball, or a basketball, or something else?
What about the table, what shape was it? What is it made of?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Now, the important question:
Did you already know, or did you have to choose a color, gender, size, etc., after being asked these questions?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Are You a Visualizer or Conceptualizer?
When you ask a visualizer about the ball on the table, they (most of them) immediately have answers to all of the questions. They are also more likely to provide extra details you didn’t ask for. This is the first clue the individual may actually be picturing the scene in their mind. For example, a visualizer might say, “The ball looks like the Pixar Ball. It’s yellow and features a blue strip with a red star. The ball is about the size of a baseball. It’s on a wooden, oval-shaped table with scratches on top, etc.”
Conceptualizers, on the other hand, approach this differently. To them, the ball on the table is primarily an idea. While they can anticipate the possible outcome – a ball, when nudged, might roll and likely fall off – many specific details, like the ball’s color, its size, the material of the table, or the gender of the person, might remain elusive to them. It’s possible that they only acknowledge or consider these details when directly prompted or questioned about them. Conceptualizers are grasping the essence or core idea, not forming a detailed picture.
Two Different Thinking Styles: Visualizing vs Conceptualizing
You can think of these different approaches to the Ball on a Table as visualizing vs. conceptualizing. These two distinct thinking styles were first articulated in the 1963 text “The Living Brain” by Walter W. Grey, and it offers unique insight into how we internalize and process information.
Visualizing: This style involves creating vivid, detailed mental images. Visualizers “see” scenarios in their mind’s eye, often complete with colors, shapes, and intricate details, akin to watching a movie unfold.
Conceptualizing: This style leans towards understanding the essence without pictorial representation. Conceptualizers grasp ideas and scenarios using their knowledge and experiences without actively “seeing” them, focusing on the abstract idea rather than visual specifics.
Conceptualizing: The Aphantasic Perspective
The Ball on a Table experiment illuminates a characteristic of aphantasia—conceptual rather than visual thinking. People with aphantasia cannot “see” the ball rolling off the table in their minds, but they can understand the concept and predict the outcome. Their thought process is more abstract, relying on knowledge, logic, and understanding rather than visual representation.
The term ‘aphantasia’ originates from the Greek word phantasia, commonly translated to ‘imagination’ and often described in the context of visualizing and dreaming. The “a” in ‘a-phantasia‘ denotes its absence. Meaning “without imagination.” But this can be misleading. Aphantasics can imagine, dream, and create. The aphantasic mind simply operates without the accompanying slideshow.
Importantly, aphantasia is not a disorder nor a limitation. In fact, many aphantasics have sharp spatial reasoning and excel in abstract thinking. Their cognitive prowess isn’t diminished; it’s just channelled differently.
Implications and Reflections
Understanding aphantasia and the broader spectrum of human imagination is essential in recognizing the diversity of human thought. The Ball on a Table experiment is more than just a playful experiment; it illuminates our unique internal experiences. It serves as a reminder that while we may share experiences, how we internalize, process, recall and imagine them can vary remarkably.
So, the next time you’re around the dinner table, try the Ball on a Table experiment. When you ask someone to imagine a situation, remember not everyone will create a detailed mental picture. Some will see clear visuals, while others will grasp the idea. Both ways of thinking are valid and show the varied ways our brains work!