>>10314721Neither (or both). Whenever there's a problem, the solution just pops out of my head instantly, automatically and subconsciously. If it's a harder problem, I scan all the information I have, and perhaps review the 'rules' of the problem out loud, and after a while the solution pops out like usual. I can imagine things just fine, but I 'see' in terms of fuzzy concepts, so, instead of imagining an apple, I see the idea of the apple along with everything I know about apples, their chemical composition, components, PH, kinds of apples, etc.
My guess is that relying on verbal or visual thinking alone will hinder you in the areas that they can't cover by themselves: Some information is more efficiently stored in image/conceptual form, like experiences, graphs, etc., other in textual form, like definitions, facts, etc.
It's easy to notice when people rely too much on either. People who rely only on visual thinking, tend to be more imaginative or have good physical orientation but are bad at defining things and accurate fact recall, and the reverse may be true for verbal thinkers. Science requires proper definitions and ability to recall facts, as well as predictive ability that comes from imagination, as well as creativity. A good scientist should be proficient in both types of thinking.
