David Hume obviously shared Alexander's idea of residues, only Hume called them impressions, and compared them (as I almost remember) as to imprints in wax, or moveable type in printing. Long time since I read Hume in detail. When I did read his Enquiry and the much longer treatise I wondered what he meant by impressions, since that was not the way that I remembered things, although unlike the idea that it is not a disability still seems to me to be one. Lacking a leg is a disability, as lacking images also is, and I find it offensive to say that I am not disabled in ways that most are abled.

Yes, I've always had a problem with eye contact. I didn't connect it to my aphantasia, nor do I see why they should be connected. Does anyone have an idea why they should be? As to aphantasia being a disability, there I agree entirely with Jeff Cagan. Since I have come to know of it, one of the features about aphantasia that troubles me the most is the fact that I cannot remember now what my wife looked like. Luckily I took lots of photos of her, but after she died in Switzerland with assistance (because of very advanced MS), one of the most troubling things was my inability to call her up to my mind's eye. This for me is a deeply negative aspect of aphantasia. In addition to not having imagery, it is hard now for me to remember people who have died, since memory, so far as I can tell, is closely allied to imagery, so that seems to explain why my memory of the past is so desolate. I have known for years that I don't have mental imagery, but didn't know until the last five years or so that the condition had a name.

I am aphantasic and so far as I know I have never dreamt. My wife used to ask me about my dreams, but I never had a dream that I could speak about.

David Hume obviously shared Alexander's idea of residues, only Hume called them impressions, and compared them (as I almost remember) as to imprints in wax, or moveable type in printing. Long time since I read Hume in detail. When I did read his Enquiry and the much longer treatise I wondered what he meant by impressions, since that was not the way that I remembered things, although unlike the idea that it is not a disability still seems to me to be one. Lacking a leg is a disability, as lacking images also is, and I find it offensive to say that I am not disabled in ways that most are abled.

Yes, I've always had a problem with eye contact. I didn't connect it to my aphantasia, nor do I see why they should be connected. Does anyone have an idea why they should be? As to aphantasia being a disability, there I agree entirely with Jeff Cagan. Since I have come to know of it, one of the features about aphantasia that troubles me the most is the fact that I cannot remember now what my wife looked like. Luckily I took lots of photos of her, but after she died in Switzerland with assistance (because of very advanced MS), one of the most troubling things was my inability to call her up to my mind's eye. This for me is a deeply negative aspect of aphantasia. In addition to not having imagery, it is hard now for me to remember people who have died, since memory, so far as I can tell, is closely allied to imagery, so that seems to explain why my memory of the past is so desolate. I have known for years that I don't have mental imagery, but didn't know until the last five years or so that the condition had a name.

I am aphantasic and so far as I know I have never dreamt. My wife used to ask me about my dreams, but I never had a dream that I could speak about.