The notion of spatial models which do not involve visual images corresponds quite closely to my own experience. And explains perhaps why it took me 68 years to realise that I did not in fact have a mind's eye. At least not a conscious one. Unconscious images can be quite startlingly vivid, but I have no conscious control over them. If I try to control them, they just fade away.

Well, I'm 68, too, and have only just discovered the concept of aphantasia. And some of the rest of your experience sounds much like mine, too. I had always assumed that everyone, including myself, could summon up images from the vasty deep. When I saw the expression "mind's eye", I assumed that I could see things with it. In a sense, I could, and can. If I try to visualise a place or person I know, something comes up on the mental screen. But it's not an image. It seems to be more like a computer programme for producing an image. I know what the image should look like, but I can't see it. And this surprises me immensely. I'm not sure that moving on from death or other losses is really linked to aphantasia but, like you, I have no difficulty whilst still feeling deep empathy with living people, and emotional links even with the departed. My dreams too are vivid and visual, and I find that some of my most vivid images are those that occur in a half-waking state, when I'm either falling asleep or waking up. But we seem to have differences, too. I am fine with long descriptive passages in literature. I can sense them, but not visualise them as an image, only as a set of instructions for an image. And, when it comes to art (I make no claim to talent), I find it relatively easy to draw an image from memory or imagination. It's just that I don't see it until I start drawing. And one thing is certain. I do have an almost constant internal monologue/dialogue which takes the form of words that I hear and, even though I am incapable of singing in tune, I can hear music in my head until it drives me crazy. This is a fascinating subject!

The notion of spatial models which do not involve visual images corresponds quite closely to my own experience. And explains perhaps why it took me 68 years to realise that I did not in fact have a mind's eye. At least not a conscious one. Unconscious images can be quite startlingly vivid, but I have no conscious control over them. If I try to control them, they just fade away.

Well, I'm 68, too, and have only just discovered the concept of aphantasia. And some of the rest of your experience sounds much like mine, too. I had always assumed that everyone, including myself, could summon up images from the vasty deep. When I saw the expression "mind's eye", I assumed that I could see things with it. In a sense, I could, and can. If I try to visualise a place or person I know, something comes up on the mental screen. But it's not an image. It seems to be more like a computer programme for producing an image. I know what the image should look like, but I can't see it. And this surprises me immensely. I'm not sure that moving on from death or other losses is really linked to aphantasia but, like you, I have no difficulty whilst still feeling deep empathy with living people, and emotional links even with the departed. My dreams too are vivid and visual, and I find that some of my most vivid images are those that occur in a half-waking state, when I'm either falling asleep or waking up. But we seem to have differences, too. I am fine with long descriptive passages in literature. I can sense them, but not visualise them as an image, only as a set of instructions for an image. And, when it comes to art (I make no claim to talent), I find it relatively easy to draw an image from memory or imagination. It's just that I don't see it until I start drawing. And one thing is certain. I do have an almost constant internal monologue/dialogue which takes the form of words that I hear and, even though I am incapable of singing in tune, I can hear music in my head until it drives me crazy. This is a fascinating subject!