How does someone with extremely weak linguistic skills formulate their thoughts?

[reloaded]

I'm curious. How does someone with extremely weak (like being tone deaf for musical intelligence) linguistic abilities formulate their thoughts in their heads? And by thoughts, I mean deeper thoughts that are perhaps philosophical in nature. Maybe if they score better in musical intelligence or spatial intelligence, do they think of it visually or something? Won't their limited vocabulary hinder their ability to think in sentences and words? I'm not sure if I'm the most effective communicator, will edit if needed.

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

Are you saying you only think in words and sentences?

You don't ever think in images or sounds or smells or feelings?

 

[reloaded]

Are you saying you only think in words and sentences?

You don't ever think in images or sounds or smells or feelings?

I'm not sure, to be honest. I can't visualize well or imagine how that feels. I'm kind of tone deaf too, if that is relevant. I'm asking because I really have no idea hence I'm curious.

Maybe I've thought in smells or images or anything, but I didn't realize it. Perhaps I'll know better once I've read how it's like

 

[Cheeseumpuffs]

I can't speak for anyone else and I don't think I'm particularly lacking linguistically speaking, but I do a large chunk of my thinking without words. I find thoughts represented by images and feelings to be more nuanced and accurate than words and sentences. The only time I really try and formulate words in my head is when I need to communicate my thoughts to other people by saying them out loud or typing them on a forum.

 

[Black Rose]

When I think it is like trying to see the back of your own head. I just know stuff. It's not verbal nor is it visual. It is just there. I have aphantasia so it is impossible for me to see my thoughts consciously though many things I think of are visual. Everything is abstract to me.

 

[Hadoblado]

Verbal thoughts can be good for formal logic, but I think it's more limiting in other ways. If a picture is worth a thousand words, one might see how thinking entirely in words might limit your intuitive grasp?

People differ a lot in their conceptual faculties.

Personally my strengths would be thinking in words and sound. I remember better with visual representations, but this is very limited: more like a string of spatial relationships than an actual whole picture. I will be able to picture someone's face for a fraction of a second before I lose it. This makes thinking in terms of motion very difficult since not much can be achieved in that time.

But then when I sleep, dreams can be vivid and concrete? What gives?

Anyway, I seem particularly specialised in thoughts that can be articulated, but I see the value in other types of thought. Often people that are less articulate just have a stronger more intuitive grasp of... basically everything, such that they can access the conclusions of their thoughts far more readily than I ever could - even if they sound less refined while doing it. Where I often need to have an entire conversation in my head before knowing what I think, others seems to have an internalised model of how a thing works and just spit out the seemingly unjustified answer.

One example of an extreme case was an high-functioning autist I used to work with. He had a representation in his head of a calendar that spanned years. Despite not doing any math, he just 'knew' what day of the week your next birthday was on if you told him when you were born, as easily as if he was reading it out from a page in front of him (easier even, the knowledge was immediately available to him).
This is sort of how I imagine more emotional/social people think. They have profoundly complex models of social relationships stored away in their heads, such that when it comes to evaluating social outcomes, the answers are just 'there' without them even being able to articulate them.

A more relatable example might be procedural memory? When you go to tie your shoes the procedure is just 'there'. I could tie my shoes 10 times over before I could articulate accurately to someone else how it is done.

 

[Minuend]

Like Cheeseumpuffs, I only articulate words in my mind when preparing to express my thoughts to someone. To me, that process feels kinda stuttery, it's difficult to translate my thinking into words. I see in abstract shapes, atmospheres, colors (not particularly strong colors, more washed out). And sometimes I just 'know' things. I don't have to think it through, I just 'know' all the strings that lead to what conclusion. Ofc to what extent I can do that is limited. These can also be the most difficult to talk to others about, because sometimes the reasoning is very subtle and I'm not able to express accurately why x is a good thing, I just know it makes sense. And figuring out which aspects I should communicate to make it most clear is tricky as well.

Regarding 'deeper' thought, those are all things I see or 'know'. I don't use words for that, other than when preparing to express them. It would be nice being better at expressing myself, how people perceive you is usually tied up to how well you do that. I do it even worse in real time than in the written word.

I do have difficulty remembering details. I will usually remember the vague process and conclusion of something, but names, places, numbers and specifics are very easily lost. It requires a lot to see everything clearly in my mind, to force out details. Part of my thinking tend to feel like trying to put a coat on a hanger but it keeps falling down. It can also be easy for me to misunderstand the written word. My thinking in general tends to feel like a bit of a blur

 

[onesteptwostep]

Just think in subjects rather than the idea itself. So basically you would have to think a step bigger before you introduce whatever you're about to talk about.

INTPs have a deconstructive thinking-style so it's natural that they're prone to stammering and a loss of prose.

To put it bluntly though, this "phenomena" is just a lack of social skills. If you have a good command of language then it shouldn't be too difficult to talk about whatever you want and steer the conversation.

 

[TheManBeyond]

thoughts are not originated in us, they are more like some kind of natural feedback, they keep us being a part of everything we experience, we are like messengers, u can kill us but u cannot kill the message

 

[pjoa09]

bizarre.


When I think I try to keep my English out of it. The minute words are in my mind I am screwed.

 

[Minuend]

Just think in subjects rather than the idea itself. So basically you would have to think a step bigger before you introduce whatever you're about to talk about.

INTPs have a deconstructive thinking-style so it's natural that they're prone to stammering and a loss of prose.

To put it bluntly though, this "phenomena" is just a lack of social skills. If you have a good command of language then it shouldn't be too difficult to talk about whatever you want and steer the conversation.

I'm not stammering. The process from thought to words feels stuttery, but I don't actually stutter when talking. It's like trying to translate to a language in which you aren't fluid. In normal, small talk scenarios it's not a problem. It's only if I'm trying to explain complex concepts I haven't thought of in words before (prepared) it becomes problematic to present an accurate or complete version of that which I'm thinking. That being said I don't tend to be interested in talking about 'complex' stuff with people I don't know well

 

[Niclmaki]

While I do have extremely strong linguistic thinking skills, I also heavily use visual thinking. To the point that I am practically deaf and blind if I am thinking intensely.

I'm not sure if I can separate the thinking styles.

This means that to communicate what I'm thinking I just describe what I am seeing in my head.

 

[bvanevery]

Jonathan Blow of game development fame cannot see visual images in his head of things. Maybe he's done an interview about that.

 

[QuickTwist]

When I think it is like trying to see the back of your own head. I just know stuff. It's not verbal nor is it visual. It is just there. I have aphantasia so it is impossible for me to see my thoughts consciously though many things I think of are visual. Everything is abstract to me.

I actually identify with this quite a bit. A lot of the time I will do something and it will not makes sense to me in the moment why I did that, but then I see the result of doing it and I sometimes have to pat myself on the back for doing such thing. Doesn't always work out so nicely, obviously, but it happens enough to where I like having this quality. Its like my mind can think faster than I can actually process what I am thinking, so I just do something and it ends up making sense.

 

[QuickTwist]

I think conscious thought is a good thing. Its a really good skill to be able to coach yourself through a difficult time. Sadly, while I may think in words a good portion of the time (though I would say I am best at remembering rhythms in a song in my head), I find it pretty difficult to actually "talk" to myself.

 

[redbaron]

they aren't think good

 

[TheManBeyond]

they aren't think good

Eat my balls

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

Often my thoughts are fragments of sentences. I'll think a few words and I'll quickly pick up on what is implied by them and not complete the thought, since it's completed in a non-verbal manner. Presumably with weaker linguistic skills, there is a greater preponderance of non-verbal thinking. Thinking abstractly without words is very doable.

 

[Happy]

I've always wondered about this.

Like, I myself think mostly in images, while words supplement for things that don't translate well to images.

But what does one do without the availability of these words?

Maybe they can see feelings

 

[AndyC]

Very similar experiences to Minuend. I see 'mental operators' which represent relationships between abstractions, it allows me to navigate through stuff too complex to articulate. Normally as colours, personalities, shapes, intuitions emotions and animations.

 

[TheManBeyond]

you all talk as if ideas come from the use of language structures in our thinking, you'll wrong, they emerge from the depths thanks to all the stimulus we've been involved in through intense focus, the surfacing is soft instead tho

 

[QuickTwist]

you all talk as if ideas come from the use of language structures in our thinking, you'll wrong, they emerge from the depths thanks to all the stimulus we've been involved in through intense focus, the surfacing is soft instead tho

I'm not sure I agree, but perhaps I do agree in part. IMO, culture is the derivative that produces specifics, not personal experience. Personal experience can only get you so far in what some might call "originality." Most of the important bits are founded on cultural norms on what is acceptable and palatable. The human experience is not a unique one, sure, but that also doesn't mean that we are locked up not free to experience the stimuli of our choosing. Choice ofc is rudimentary here and most of what we are exposed to comes once again from our culture. Its evolution baby.

https://youtu.be/aDaOgu2CQtI

Shitty song but the lyrics are at least on point.

 

[TheManBeyond]

imitation, assimilation, innovation (aka "deeper thoughts")

 

[QuickTwist]

imitation, assimilation, innovation (aka "deeper thoughts")

Trump would not be president if that was the case.

 

[TheManBeyond]

Trump would not be president if that was the case.

I don't get it, can u explain?

 

[QuickTwist]

I don't get it, can u explain?

The illuminati isn't real, so that whole thing about the boogie man controlling everything behind the scenes is a farce.