I am literally speechless, thinking that it wasn't an idiom; and that the monologue as recorded in e.g. modern literature, was likely meant to be read and as is read as a transcription...
I have always at a deeply unexamined level assumed that that was just a convention of how literature functions through its medium, language; that the recording of thought through its semantic content was a (to me "obvious") necessary translation-layer thing.
I don't have a headache, but I might have to go sit somewhere and stare with my eyes unfocused for a while, to come to terms with this. I've been cross examining my coworker (who does "hear the voice") about what that even means.
The aphantasia thing was curious. This is somehow much more of a shock.
Yes, for example there's the movie trope of becoming able to hear "the thoughts of others", and then the person goes in a bar and hears these sentences, like "hm I wonder if she ..." and so on.
I pointed out how unrealistic this is and you obviously couldn't hear such things, as thoughts aren't literally sentences like this. And my friend was just brushing my comment off as if I was not making any sense, since thoughts are obviously sentences like this (for him)...
Yes, I always thought that when a novelist describes the “voice in the head” of a character, or when a coworker does the same, they are trying to convey thought over a medium incapable of conveying true thought.
I never imagined that that was the actual thought!
Do you not hear music in your head? Like I have a song running through my mind right now, lyrics and all. No visuals just the music. If you don’t hear a voice in your head wouldn’t that mean you can’t ever hear music in your head either?
Other person here: I can only hear realistic sounds and visualize realistic images when I'm in a half-asleep state or in dreams. Otherwise it's very blunt. For example I cannot realistically hear music in my mind, I can imagine myself humming it though (and my vocal muscles ever so slightly tense up if I do), and I can imagine myself speaking in the same way, but it's mostly a very faint thing, and is mostly about imagined movement of my mouth etc., rather than sound. E.g. imagine clapping your hands as a motoric action, but imagine them in your hand, not the visual of it, but imagine what it would feel like in your arms and hands. It's a bit going in that direction with my imagined speech.
I am literally speechless, thinking that it wasn't an idiom; and that the monologue as recorded in e.g. modern literature, was likely meant to be read and as is read as a transcription...
I have always at a deeply unexamined level assumed that that was just a convention of how literature functions through its medium, language; that the recording of thought through its semantic content was a (to me "obvious") necessary translation-layer thing.
I don't have a headache, but I might have to go sit somewhere and stare with my eyes unfocused for a while, to come to terms with this. I've been cross examining my coworker (who does "hear the voice") about what that even means.
The aphantasia thing was curious. This is somehow much more of a shock.