>>512266945there is a problem with the whole "internal monologue" thing in that communicating what is in your mind can be really hard for alot of people
so someone could have an internal monologue but to them they wouldn't describe it that way so they say "no i dont have one" and then things get messy from there.
like i have no way to know that the red i see is EXACTLY the same red that you see.
and if we are on a phone call i cant describe red in a way that makes you see or understand the red that im thinking of.
like even with infinite time and infinite words it will just never happen.
so someone might think internal monologue is like a "stanley parable" style narration of every single action they perform or think about performing. which isnt true.
so again might say "no i dont have that" and get recorded as not having an internal monologue when they do in fact have one.
so for example everything i think its spoken in my voice in my mind as if i were speaking it out loud using my mouth and vocal cords.
and the same for everything i type and everything i read
also an almost constant "talking to myself" inside myself.
also to people who truly dont have an internal monologue thoughts and feelings and things they want to do probably come to them the same way some (i dont known the correct word) math prodigies understand math, the answer simple comes to them and they know it, they dont know how they know it, they didnt have some kind of internal calculation with steps and thoughts to get to the answer, they just saw an equation and knew the answer.
and even to non prodigies they can know something without thinking in their head, but if they needed to break down the process they could do so in their mind, whereas those who have no internal monologue simply cant and not only that but cant even imagine themselves or anyone else doing that.
its pretty weird.
but aphantasia is even weirder(actual soulless bugmen)