I always use words.I can not do without.
Actually, I think my concepts become more real once I use the perfect combination of words to describe them.Until then they remain abstracter. Once I have the right words, it flows out of me, in reality and concretization.
I think in images, feelings, abstract ideas and words.Often it is also an unconscious process that suddenly comes above floating in my conscious brain as a new experience, conclusion of which I know to have a truth without knowing the words. I have this when I think about very technical matters in my work (software engineering), or My studies (physics) or in my hobbies (art and music). Many thinking patterns are not in words to grasp. The luxury of a draughtsman and musician is that many other modes are available to make ideas. I see colors, patterns, tones. As a physical and software developer I see patterns that are difficult to grasp in words, but for which a visual language (diagrams), formulas or code is needed. My language proficiency is actually the least developed. A certain concept can be translated into words in thousands of ways. Unfortunately, I often lack the richness and nuaces to think of exactly the right words on my mind.
Thank you very much for this question.
This is one of the problems I have and also why I use the voice memos which is unfortunately a beta version.
I actually think mostly in shapes.In three-dimensional abstract and in almost cinematic, look there shoots are again too short, persecutions of that abstract.
This often means that a certain problem or even conversation in my head plays out and solves completely, but that the communication to other persons is stoked.
I am currently very interested in the Higgs field not the particles the field itself.That story occurs as if they were playing a movie in my head. You see the shapes the mathematical equations the other dimensions. All that hassle, you see evaluating, are adopting logical prosecutions. But if you ask me write it up in math sorry that won’t go.
I’ve done HAVO VWO level WIS and physics and chemistry however there ran the Spaak. The ideas of 4 5 and 6 dimensional space I can draw.I could not convert into language or math number and that is a very big problem. The normal people seem to be experiencing problems when proposing in their heads of multiple spatial patterns and so I always think. I always think in multiple spatial patterns even in such a thing daily as grocery packing in the car. I see that everything fits in and in which order it should be used. Just because it is a puzzle is a 3D puzzle simple application of difficult substance.
This, for example, also works for particles in chemistry in all the sciences in which one tries to understand how time space and matter are sticking together.I can do it for it and I can say exactly where a something will stand or will be located. However, the language is inadequate. Also because it is the concept of of perception on a particle for example indeed true if you perceive it you will not see it if you predicted it in your head you can catch it. The same goes for bigger or so you want smaller situations. When and how do you tell that. I have the idea that speaking and listening as well as writing is so much too short that I almost want people to be able to show what I have in my mind so that they understand it.
Language does not. It is also often so that if I write by hand, I do sometimes, that I then skip sentences because I am writing in the meantime thinking of assuming that my hand writes on what I think but I think faster as that my hand writes so I find language a very outdated communication system.
I only put half my thoughts into language if there is absolutely no other possibility like now. I am therefore not very social.
There are people who, as it were, have a report with me and who can read what I think, that is why I prefer to work with it.
If I want to mentally solve a problem then I think in images or in abstract concepts that may seem most like a mathematical model.For example, if I think about bridge, the different karting and bids in my mind are linked to symbols that look vague but have a clear place relative to each other. Only in two dimensions, usually, although three dimensional thoughts also occur. To think in four dimensions, I have to make efforts and get tired quickly.
This may sound like I’m very visually inserted but that’s not so. The only thing I can draw well are landkarten and floorplans.I am particularly bad at recognizing faces, and am often unaware of what color or form a building or object has, even though I come across it daily.
I also often think in language but that is especially if I want to consider how I can tell someone else.I almost never think in my mother tongue and it is therefore often that I do not have a word. That’s for thinking no problem, unless it’s really important to me is exactly how I have to word it. So if I don’t have a word then it wont be replaced with the concept.
Occasionally I think in language when I have to reproduce an expression of someone else to think about what exactly ie meant.
I read in the book “The Emperor’s New Mind” by the physicist Roger Penrose that many philosophies think that language is a condition of thought, whereas neuroscientists do not usually see that.He thinks it is because philosophies themselves think a lot in language, while naturalist scientists like himself do not. I find that frapant: I would think that fundamental processes such as thinking in every human being happens in about the same way, only we have different ways to rationalize and describe it intelektual. On the other hand, the two sides of the language/thinking controversial are fairly persistent. So maybe he’s right.
I have been very auditory, although I am very often listening to my answers to English-speaking Quora with relevant illustrations, I listened to the weekly popular scientific programmes of the BBC World Service since my student time, Now I follow dozens of podcasts.Never stood still, but I think I will first give my ideas in words.
I can only answer this question by thinking in words.If you write and also think about what you write, or if you are confronted with your own language, this is a thought in words.
Sometimes you have something that you cannot grasp well in words.Then you know something but you don’t know how to say it. Even if you speak a different language, you can reach the limitations of your knowledge of that language. What you want to say is a kind of understanding, you often see a kind of image. A movie in which a particular thought expresses itself.
You may wonder if feelings have something to do with thoughts.Feelings are the engine behind ‘ interest ‘. If you’re interested in something, certain dust will be on your own. You study and read in language, but the language itself can also evoke images again. “Oh, that’s what he means,” you think, but that intent is a kind of image. You may be able to translate it back into words, but these words reflect the image, not the image itself.
If you program, or, for example, you are immersed in a mathematical problem, it can also be handled outside of the language.The language at most is a tool, but the real mind flight is not linguistically.
Feelings, sadness, joy, excitement and defeat can be with your thoughts, but they are not thoughts.In a sense it is abstractions, and these abstractions are far more effective than the language. “I’m hungry”, is language, “he Can Dance well”, “he’s a good actor”, “That’s a beautiful painting”, “I had to cry very very much when he said that,” is all language, but it’s about not having the experience. Even if you read a good story, it all evokes images. The words are tools that unlock the images.
I really can’t see how an unworded thought would look like.Feelings and moods don’t need words, but thoughts right, I think.
Are you sure it comes to notions and not to vague feelings?
I think people are born as image thinkers.School adds a new element: language. People with predisposition for language can easily and seamlessly create a link between them. Others have a bit more trouble with that. In their head, image thinkers make connections between all sorts of components and see the large whole. Language works the other way around: works towards a large whole.