/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #12175714

117KiB, 1279x824, 4000.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

4000 words per minute INNER SPEECH

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 19:00:32 2020 No.12175714 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>12176372 >>12176382 >>12176393 >>12176479 >>12176503 >>12176514 >>12176573 >>12176589 >>12176605

wtf?
source:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pms.1990.71.3.1043

i literally never think in words anymore, now that i'm older I just concept map. Instead of actually thinking a sentence, I just know what i'm thinking without having to say it. I mainly only have an inner speech while reading because I have to take in someone else's input

>not a science or math btw lol i know

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 19:06:08 No.12175745 Report

Quoted By:

I just think in sex because I'm horny all the time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:04:57 No.12176372 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
It's normal, sometimes it takes me a lot of time to express millisecond tough, however to get more abstracted, it takes time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:07:54 No.12176382 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
It's possible, but it's bordering schizophrenia. Be careful with the doors you open, OP.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1498052722801.jpg, 55KiB, 300x300

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:11:31 No.12176393 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
those are some rookie numbers

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:39:41 No.12176479 Report

Quoted By: >>12176482 >>12176489

>>12175714
7 words a second sounds about right, although you need to obviously be reciting something you know or talking gibberish.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:41:08 No.12176482 Report

Quoted By: >>12176491

>>12176479
Okay, I realized I forgot a zero. Surely they meant 400 words a minute and not 4000, 70 words a second sounds absolutely absurd.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:44:53 No.12176489 Report

Quoted By:

>>12176479
What if they're unconscious words? When you think, you often visualize, and that visualization is tied to words you may not "hear" in your head, but are present when you put them to speech. How else could we construct sentences so instantly without effort?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:45:17 No.12176491 Report

Quoted By: >>12176507 >>12176529 >>12176679

>>12176482
>surely they meant 400 words a minute
I don't think they'd make such an error anon.
I think a few thousand words per minute, idk how many exactly, but yes I think far far faster than I can ever possibly speak or type, I thought everyone did this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:51:11 No.12176503 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
>First Published December 1, 1990
Into the trash it goes

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:52:43 No.12176507 Report

Quoted By:

>>12176491
If they're talking strictly about subvocalization, then almost 70 words per second sounds excessive. You could finish Moby Dick in less than an hour at that rate, more than 10 pages a minute.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 22:54:38 No.12176514 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
>expanded that volume of words into a full statement

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:00:16 No.12176529 Report

Quoted By: >>12176532

>>12176491
tell me more. Are these complete, well-defined words like you'd write or estimations of sorts. How's the vocabulary at that speed? Is that sort of speed useful in certain tasks? I'm asking because I've changed the nature of my internal monologue several times and I wanna see if very rapid verbal thinking is worth learning.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:02:08 No.12176532 Report

Quoted By: >>12176550

>>12176529
>I'm asking because I've changed the nature of my internal monologue several times
How the heck did you manage to do that? I've tried to shift my way of thinking, including more visualization and less inner voice, but I always default to the inner voice if I'm not paying attention.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:08:48 No.12176550 Report

Quoted By: >>12176581

>>12176532
You were on track but you didn't force it. The only way to truly switch is to do all thinking in that format. You can tell its working if your internal monologue changes in your dreams. I switched from a deliberate, slow verbal to a purely visual in a month or so, but it required forcing it constantly for a week. Also, I found the visual part very vague unless I closed my eyes and relaxed for a while at first. I had to gradually do it when more alert until I could overlay my vision.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:15:25 No.12176573 Report

Quoted By: >>12176609

>>12175714
How do you even measure that

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:19:37 No.12176581 Report

Quoted By:

>>12176550
Interesting. Makes sense actually, you need to rely on it for your brain to make it a habit, but man, any time I need to problem solve my visualization goes to crap and my inner voice goes into overdrive. Sounds like I need to keep working at it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:22:08 No.12176589 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
This isn't talking about thinking. Its talking about inner speech/inner subvocalization. Thoughts are different in a sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:26:59 No.12176605 Report

Quoted By:

>>12175714
I "concept map" as well. I can zoom out above my position right now and imagine the entire landscape around me in a millisecond. But I don't actually "imagine" it. What I think happens is that my brain opens up a bundle of probabilities and they only collapse when I decide to zoom in into the detail, and that what I see as a concept is the probabilities themselves represented by a crude approximation without any detail. 90% of my thought process is like this and you eventually get used to it as you enter your 20s and even begin to excel at it by your 30s. I don't think that my thought process would be so fluid and lacking any resistance whatsoever if I used inner speech instead.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 29 Sep 2020 23:28:28 No.12176609 Report

Quoted By:

>>12176573
It's classic psychology quackery
They write it out afterwards in as wordy of a way as possible
I thought /sci/ was better than this

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 30 Sep 2020 00:04:16 No.12176679 Report

Quoted By:

>>12176491
Dude. 70 words a second means reciting the alphabet 3 times a second.
Try reciting the alphabet 1 time a second. I can kind of just skim through it, but I'm not really saying each letter, just like skipping past every 3 letters.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches