No internal monologue

[ItsNick]

I didn't really know where on the forum to place it so I placed it here because I did want to share this.

Appearantly there exist people who do not have an internal monologue. I find it almost impossible to imagine but it seems to be real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj5rdUCa2xo

 

 

 

[Erick]

Yeah I saw this a few months ago, what's funny/weird is that a lot of people view these kind of individuals as 'philosophical zombies", they believe that just because someone doesn't talk to themeselves that they don't have awareness. That goes to show how much we are identified with our minds, as Eckhart tolle said we view the wolrd through our minds and these people seem like they are dead inside but honestly they have a very big advantage when it comes to the spiritual path so I envy them a little bit x)
Thanks for sharing this video, it's very interesting.

[ItsNick]

2 hours ago, Erick said:

Yeah I saw this a few months ago, what's funny/weird is that a lot of people view these kind of individuals as 'philosophical zombies", they believe that just because someone doesn't talk to themeselves that they don't have awareness. That goes to show how much we are identified with our minds, as Eckhart tolle said we view the wolrd through our minds and these people seem like they are dead inside but honestly they have a very big advantage when it comes to the spiritual path so I envy them a little bit x)
Thanks for sharing this video, it's very interesting.

Yeah I'm curious about them though.

I also have been thinking about this more today and about how people can't imagine they can write in journals without an internal monologue. But then I realized people don't know where their own internal monologue comes from either. Our thoughts arise from nothing.

[Nahm]

The experiential difference appears to be “self” referential thinking...thoughts about a self which isn’t a self, but rather an idea of a self, firmly believed to actually be a self. A simpler general way of saying that is identification with thoughts. His example of being in the shower thinking about winning a past debate is exemplary of believing the thoughts that there is a past and a him and a them, whereas she’d just be taking a shower, not thinking thoughts about a “self”, as the self is showering. Then of course there is no mind, no thoughts, as there is no one in a shower. In all cases there is no ‘inner monologue’. That’d be an example of a “self” referential thought. (There is not any actuality of that self).

[ItsNick]

52 minutes ago, Nahm said:

The experiential difference appears to be “self” referential thinking...thoughts about a self which isn’t a self, but rather an idea of a self, firmly believed to actually be a self. A simpler general way of saying that is identification with thoughts. His example of being in the shower thinking about winning a past debate is exemplary of believing the thoughts that there is a past and a him and a them, whereas she’d just be taking a shower, not thinking thoughts about a “self”, as the self is showering. Then of course there is no mind, no thoughts, as there is no one in a shower. In all cases there is no ‘inner monologue’. That’d be an example of a “self” referential thought. (There is not any actuality of that self).

But is that the only difference?

I partly agree because in the example of the shower thoughts it's indeed an internal thought process about his self in the past.

But not every thought that I don't have to say out loud but happens internally is about my self. It's possible to think deeply or creatively about some problem you're trying to solve or question you're trying to answer without any reference to self.

Although I am still interested in how different she experiences the illusion of self if at all because this illusion is so strongly connected to our internal monologue or "the voice" in our heads.

[Nahm]

@ItsNick

It’s not so much connected but the same as her experience of the self.

[Erick]

4 hours ago, ItsNick said:

Yeah I'm curious about them though.

I also have been thinking about this more today and about how people can't imagine they can write in journals without an internal monologue. But then I realized people don't know where their own internal monologue comes from either. Our thoughts arise from nothing.

And it's very interesting how she was describing that she sees the "shapes of paragraphs", that goes to show that there are endless ways a conscious being can experience life and just within our species we have variations. Now let's just imagine what an alien's mind would look like, if they exist (which is likely) their "minds" will probably be so different from ours that they may not even be minds anymore but something even more sophisticated, who knows. 
It's freaking amazing honestly

Edited July 31, 2020 by Erick

[Osaid]

There also exist people who cant imagine any images in their head

[LastThursday]

It's pretty weird to me that people find it weird that people don't have an internal monologue.  If you get me.

I do have an internal monologue, but not exclusively.

For example if I'm working on coding, then how could I have a monologue for this sort of thing?:

function monologue ($speak_to_yourself) {

    echo $speak_to_yourself;

}

I may use an internal monologue to say the odd word here and there as I'm typing it, but I don't think about coding with a monologue at all. It's mostly visual if anything, or usually it just bubbles up from nowhere, or it's a kind of intangible sensation.

I definitely don't have an internal monologue in conversation. And I definitely don't have a running commentary as I go about my day.

I think many people identify so strongly with their internal monologue that they confuse it with consciousness or awareness or a sense of self. Nothing could be further from the truth. Honestly, if you were zapped with a ray gun that made you stop talking to yourself, you would still continue to exist and to think.

Edited August 1, 2020 by LastThursday

[commie]

Yeah, the way she waves the shapes of sentences is so cool.

7 hours ago, Erick said:

what's funny/weird is that a lot of people view these kind of individuals as 'philosophical zombies", they believe that just because someone doesn't talk to themeselves that they don't have awareness

Do these people also figure non-human animals, infants or severely mentally disabled folks are p-zombies?

Edited August 1, 2020 by commie

[ItsNick]

1 hour ago, LastThursday said:

For example if I'm working on coding, then how could I have a monologue for this sort of thing?

Good point. Same goes for mathematical thinking and there are probably many other examples.

@Erick Yeah the internal monologue is just a fraction of mind. There is so much more to it.

 

[Vagos]

So these people are then in a constant meditative state? This is such a self actualization privilege cheat...