jpfromlondon

>they imagine that they see something and lack the language to convey the imagined unperceived object, the notion of phantasia or aphantasia is merely a by-product of the term "picture it in your mind's eye" or the like, leading many ignorant people to believe that something is literally rendered within the individual's head.

I think by any reasonable definition everyone has aphantasia, which is why it's a nothing burger.

aaw, touched a nerve have I because I'm suggesting you're not special?

>Prove it.

Precisely, unfalsifiable nonsense.

>You can't keep track of your own argument

MY argument is this: people don't actually see things or even have imagery inside their head, which is normal, and self-proclaimed aphantasiacs are attention seekers who think they have a disability or special characteristic...there is no logical inconsistency in my argument.

Neither, they imagine that they see something and lack the language to convey the imagined unperceived object, the notion of phantasia or aphantasia is merely a by-product of the term "picture it in your mind's eye" or the like, leading many ignorant people to believe that something is literally rendered within the individual's head.

Realising this is not the case is waking up, but then some attention seekers gave it the name aphantasia to make themselves feel special.

You're absolutely right.

Nobody hallucinates or "sees" the object, it's like an object instantiation with default properties that you can name/describe, nothing more.

If you quiz someone long enough you can get them to acknowledge they don't see anything "in their head" whatever that means.

This nonsense makes me irrationally annoyed, I suspect because it's unfalsifiable attention seeking, some people I've met mention it every chance they get angling at it being some sort of disability. I get it, you don't see anything...I don't see anything either...nobody does.

What are you talking about, the North Sea was first drilled by a British state-run (at the time) oil company.

Protein isn't just necessary for activity, protein is essential in brain development and function, data show lower iqs in those who opt for a vegan or vegetarian diet despite those people on average tending to be higher-educated.

thus reducing their agency, it'll be interesting at least to see if this generation grows up to prefer a lengthened name (or "long name") equivalent to todays "short name". For a period my parents called me Jim, a name I despise as an adult, thankfully the root of that short name has many branches, not that it matters because I only use the initial.

Nobody ever got fired for choosing Bloomberg, even if there was a viable alternative there is no way anyone is pioneering the switch.

Leo, Freddie, Theo, etc.

aren't contractions lazy by nature?

Regardless, I'm glad you're averse.

what surprises and annoys me is Briton's willingness to name their children shortened versions of existing names, it's lazy, so many Archies and Alfies, ugh.

evidently you are unfamiliar with experimental science or clinical trials, like it or not self experimentation and the consumption/administration of psychoactive substances is considered unethical, rightly or wrongly.

In the case of self-testing it raises concerns of objectivity, not just in terms of perception and observation but with regards to bias and intent, throwing into question the results and reasons for the study.

Scotland, Wales, and NI have their own parliaments at least, so from a constitutional perspective one could argue England is not a country but a state, but that is only one narrow definition.

it's the hand-wringing do-gooders that implemented all of the authoritarian practices in the uk.