Pictorial Thinking

[Federica]

About the crucial importance of pictorial-creative thinking to balance out the dominance of intellectual-earthly thinking, I've come across an insightful substack in John E Rollinson's "The Consciousness Soul" today. This is about the negative effects of teaching children to read too early and abstractly. It provides yet another angle on the question. Even games like puzzles and legos are problematic if played too early. A jigsaw puzzle pushes the forming consciousness of the child to learn that there is only one right solution. It contributes to impose intellectual thinking and constraint-driven problem solving, rather than pictorial thinking and creative problem solving. As someone who was good at reading, writing and arithmetics before the age of 4, and also a big lego and puzzle player, I have been blown away by this article. This topic should probably be explored more by those who have or will have small children, of their own or in their families, and maybe meditated for oneself. What a life path of slowly uncovering the overpowering influence of the intellect, striving to reestablish some balance, to painstakingly unearth the light of thinking...

[Lou Gold]

Some might resonate with the mind illustrations of moonassi. I surely do.

This one struck me as 'instant karma' and made me laugh. There is so much more to explore. Do have a look. Also, his interviews, which translate well, offer an exploration of his thoughts.

[Federica]

I will do a post à la Lou here and pin an article on aphantasia, the inability to think pictorially. My impression is that it's a gradient that can be developed, and I have a hard time conceiving that for some this faculty is entirely missing with no chance to be awakened. I may be wrong. In any case, I'll link this description for future reference:

In October, the writer John Green tweeted about the red apple test, revealing that he can’t see mental imagery either. “I always thought ‘visualize’ meant thinking of the words/ideas/feelings associated with a thing, not actual visuals,” he wrote, adding that his choice of profession aligned with this. “For me everything has always been made out of language, so language is a natural fit.”

...

As a journalist, when reporting, I have to make sure to take photographs of everything I’m seeing so that I can refer back to it later. It’s not my instinct to describe physical details in my writing – it’s something editors often have to remind me to do. What someone looks like, what they are wearing – it’s not as interesting to me as what they are feeling, or the ideas that they have.

...

Blomkvist has heard that some aphants find it hard that they can’t visually remember loved ones that might have died or moved away. This rings true for me: a best friend of mine, who died in 2020, had an infectious smile, and to see it – really see it – I have to look at photos of him, which I do often. An ex-boyfriend who I haven’t seen since we split up is often in my memories, but not in visual form. He can feel like a ghost. But my memories of people I’ve loved are visceral to me in other ways. My favorite description of aphantasia comes from an essay by Mette Leonard Høeg in Psyche. She wrote that her imagination and memories have a strong spatial component. When Høeg remembers the house she grew up in as a child, “I can feel it, almost physically, when I think of it,” she wrote. My memories are very physical too, and these sensations map on to concepts and emotions. Recently, when remembering something that my current boyfriend and I discussed last spring in London, I recalled that we were on an escalator while talking; I could sense the memory of the movement of my body going up the moving stairs.

https://www.theguardian.com/wellness/20 ... tasia-like

[AshvinP]

I will do a post à la Lou here and pin an article on aphantasia, the inability to think pictorially. My impression is that it's a gradient that can be developed, and I have a hard time conceiving that for some this faculty is entirely missing with no chance to be awakened. I may be wrong. In any case, I'll link this description for future reference:

In October, the writer John Green tweeted about the red apple test, revealing that he can’t see mental imagery either. “I always thought ‘visualize’ meant thinking of the words/ideas/feelings associated with a thing, not actual visuals,” he wrote, adding that his choice of profession aligned with this. “For me everything has always been made out of language, so language is a natural fit.”

...

As a journalist, when reporting, I have to make sure to take photographs of everything I’m seeing so that I can refer back to it later. It’s not my instinct to describe physical details in my writing – it’s something editors often have to remind me to do. What someone looks like, what they are wearing – it’s not as interesting to me as what they are feeling, or the ideas that they have.

...

Blomkvist has heard that some aphants find it hard that they can’t visually remember loved ones that might have died or moved away. This rings true for me: a best friend of mine, who died in 2020, had an infectious smile, and to see it – really see it – I have to look at photos of him, which I do often. An ex-boyfriend who I haven’t seen since we split up is often in my memories, but not in visual form. He can feel like a ghost. But my memories of people I’ve loved are visceral to me in other ways. My favorite description of aphantasia comes from an essay by Mette Leonard Høeg in Psyche. She wrote that her imagination and memories have a strong spatial component. When Høeg remembers the house she grew up in as a child, “I can feel it, almost physically, when I think of it,” she wrote. My memories are very physical too, and these sensations map on to concepts and emotions. Recently, when remembering something that my current boyfriend and I discussed last spring in London, I recalled that we were on an escalator while talking; I could sense the memory of the movement of my body going up the moving stairs.

https://www.theguardian.com/wellness/20 ... tasia-like

It's interesting because the Aphantasia issue can actually become an advantage in concentration. I think we are all familiar with the inner stance that Cleric described in Part 2:

What mental image should we use for our meditative concentration? The image itself is not of prime importance (although it may have an impact if it is emotionally charged, thus initially more neutral images are preferable). What counts is that the image should anchor our more encompassing intuition about what the whole purpose of the meditation is, and it should rest in a fruitful feeling context. Even the puzzle piece that we use for illustration can be used as a mental image for meditation. The important thing is not the concrete perceptual details of the image but that it is imbued with the intuition that we developed above. We should try to feel how because of everything we said so far, this puzzle piece holds for us a quite different meaning than it would for a random person to whom we say: “Imagine a puzzle piece.” They would immediately imagine one, yet almost certainly the meaning that they will experience would be one of a “small colorful object that fits in a bigger picture.” Try to appreciate how different the meaning is if we concentrate on such a mental image when it is grasped in the context of what we’re discussing.

If we understand this, we should also understand that there’s no need to stare into the mental image as if we expect it to crack open and see some more exotic perceptions fly out from it. We also shouldn’t expect that some ground-breaking insights will emerge from this simple concentration. What happens is usually much more trivial, yet it is precisely in such small steps that we slowly but surely move toward deeper insights.

This expectation for the image itself to be the source of more exoteric perceptions and deeper insights could be heightened if we have a rich visualization capacity to begin with. In that case, we may more easily lose sight of the intuitive gestures that are made in the process of concentration, the delicate sensitivity of our concentrated activity to the nudges of the various soul grooves in which it flows. In that way, 'visualize' is more about intuitively sensing the ideas and feelings associated with our concentrated state than it is about focusing on vivid perceptual details. If we start out with a weak visualization capacity to begin with, the etheric layer of holistic imaginations we eventually reach may be all the more richer and meaningful since we have grown sensitive to the fine intuitive gestures of our soul life.

[Federica]

I will do a post à la Lou here and pin an article on aphantasia, the inability to think pictorially. My impression is that it's a gradient that can be developed, and I have a hard time conceiving that for some this faculty is entirely missing with no chance to be awakened. I may be wrong. In any case, I'll link this description for future reference:

In October, the writer John Green tweeted about the red apple test, revealing that he can’t see mental imagery either. “I always thought ‘visualize’ meant thinking of the words/ideas/feelings associated with a thing, not actual visuals,” he wrote, adding that his choice of profession aligned with this. “For me everything has always been made out of language, so language is a natural fit.”

...

As a journalist, when reporting, I have to make sure to take photographs of everything I’m seeing so that I can refer back to it later. It’s not my instinct to describe physical details in my writing – it’s something editors often have to remind me to do. What someone looks like, what they are wearing – it’s not as interesting to me as what they are feeling, or the ideas that they have.

...

Blomkvist has heard that some aphants find it hard that they can’t visually remember loved ones that might have died or moved away. This rings true for me: a best friend of mine, who died in 2020, had an infectious smile, and to see it – really see it – I have to look at photos of him, which I do often. An ex-boyfriend who I haven’t seen since we split up is often in my memories, but not in visual form. He can feel like a ghost. But my memories of people I’ve loved are visceral to me in other ways. My favorite description of aphantasia comes from an essay by Mette Leonard Høeg in Psyche. She wrote that her imagination and memories have a strong spatial component. When Høeg remembers the house she grew up in as a child, “I can feel it, almost physically, when I think of it,” she wrote. My memories are very physical too, and these sensations map on to concepts and emotions. Recently, when remembering something that my current boyfriend and I discussed last spring in London, I recalled that we were on an escalator while talking; I could sense the memory of the movement of my body going up the moving stairs.

https://www.theguardian.com/wellness/20 ... tasia-like

It's interesting because the Aphantasia issue can actually become an advantage in concentration. I think we are all familiar with the inner stance that Cleric described in Part 2:

What mental image should we use for our meditative concentration? The image itself is not of prime importance (although it may have an impact if it is emotionally charged, thus initially more neutral images are preferable). What counts is that the image should anchor our more encompassing intuition about what the whole purpose of the meditation is, and it should rest in a fruitful feeling context. Even the puzzle piece that we use for illustration can be used as a mental image for meditation. The important thing is not the concrete perceptual details of the image but that it is imbued with the intuition that we developed above. We should try to feel how because of everything we said so far, this puzzle piece holds for us a quite different meaning than it would for a random person to whom we say: “Imagine a puzzle piece.” They would immediately imagine one, yet almost certainly the meaning that they will experience would be one of a “small colorful object that fits in a bigger picture.” Try to appreciate how different the meaning is if we concentrate on such a mental image when it is grasped in the context of what we’re discussing.

If we understand this, we should also understand that there’s no need to stare into the mental image as if we expect it to crack open and see some more exotic perceptions fly out from it. We also shouldn’t expect that some ground-breaking insights will emerge from this simple concentration. What happens is usually much more trivial, yet it is precisely in such small steps that we slowly but surely move toward deeper insights.

This expectation for the image itself to be the source of more exoteric perceptions and deeper insights could be heightened if we have a rich visualization capacity to begin with. In that case, we may more easily lose sight of the intuitive gestures that are made in the process of concentration, the delicate sensitivity of our concentrated activity to the nudges of the various soul grooves in which it flows. In that way, 'visualize' is more about intuitively sensing the ideas and feelings associated with our concentrated state than it is about focusing on vivid perceptual details. If we start out with a weak visualization capacity to begin with, the etheric layer of holistic imaginations we eventually reach may be all the more richer and meaningful since we have grown sensitive to the fine intuitive gestures of our soul life.

I'm surprised by this take, since for concentration it's nonetheless necessary to be able to create and hold a mental image. Even more so for the first of Steiner's subsidiary exercises, or the ones in the Seer's Handbook. If the inability is as stated - that is a complete impossibility to create or recreate a picture in one's mind's eye - I would see it as a definitive obstacle to spiritual development. (As I said, I know that people tend to be sentimentally attached to their diagnoses, and I am skeptical that the impossibility to visualize is really as categorical as described).

[Cleric K]

What mental image should we use for our meditative concentration? The image itself is not of prime importance (although it may have an impact if it is emotionally charged, thus initially more neutral images are preferable). What counts is that the image should anchor our more encompassing intuition about what the whole purpose of the meditation is, and it should rest in a fruitful feeling context. Even the puzzle piece that we use for illustration can be used as a mental image for meditation. The important thing is not the concrete perceptual details of the image but that it is imbued with the intuition that we developed above. We should try to feel how because of everything we said so far, this puzzle piece holds for us a quite different meaning than it would for a random person to whom we say: “Imagine a puzzle piece.” They would immediately imagine one, yet almost certainly the meaning that they will experience would be one of a “small colorful object that fits in a bigger picture.” Try to appreciate how different the meaning is if we concentrate on such a mental image when it is grasped in the context of what we’re discussing.

If we understand this, we should also understand that there’s no need to stare into the mental image as if we expect it to crack open and see some more exotic perceptions fly out from it. We also shouldn’t expect that some ground-breaking insights will emerge from this simple concentration. What happens is usually much more trivial, yet it is precisely in such small steps that we slowly but surely move toward deeper insights.

This expectation for the image itself to be the source of more exoteric perceptions and deeper insights could be heightened if we have a rich visualization capacity to begin with. In that case, we may more easily lose sight of the intuitive gestures that are made in the process of concentration, the delicate sensitivity of our concentrated activity to the nudges of the various soul grooves in which it flows. In that way, 'visualize' is more about intuitively sensing the ideas and feelings associated with our concentrated state than it is about focusing on vivid perceptual details. If we start out with a weak visualization capacity to begin with, the etheric layer of holistic imaginations we eventually reach may be all the more richer and meaningful since we have grown sensitive to the fine intuitive gestures of our soul life.

I'm surprised by this take, since for concentration it's nonetheless necessary to be able to create and hold a mental image. Even more so for the first of Steiner's subsidiary exercises, or the ones in the Seer's Handbook. If the inability is as stated - that is a complete impossibility to create or recreate a picture in one's mind's eye - I would see it as a definitive obstacle to spiritual development. (As I said, I know that people tend to be sentimentally attached to their diagnoses, and I am skeptical that the impossibility to visualize is really as categorical as described).

It occurred to me that probably we can get a good idea of the purpose of meditation by thinking about a letter . We can imagine this very vividly. We can write down on a sheet of paper certain ideas, even some intimate things from our feeling life. Then we put the paper in an envelope and seal it. Now we can place this letter somewhere and anytime our gaze glances over it, it acts as a rich symbol that anchors everything that we have expressed there. We should really try to feel how practically nothing of these things can be seen by just staring at the sealed letter. This is precisely the healthy mood in meditation.

We can really use this symbol in meditation. We can imagine how we put there everything we have read here or in all books. This is a tremendous amount of text but we can magically fit it in the envelope. Yet all this text only serves a purpose if it connects with our living experience, just like the words through which we have laid down our feelings, connect to our soul life. Then we can go even further and imagine that there's much more text that takes form inside the letter as our consciousness expands into the Cosmos.

From this perspective it should be easier to see how the vividness in which we imagine the envelope in meditation is completely secondary. Even if we can visualize it in photorealistic vividness, we still can't see anything of what is written inside. What's inside comes from the opposite direction, so to speak.

For example, we may struggle with some deep question. We can imagine that the answer is already in the envelope but it will become apparent to us only if it descends from the periphery, through us, toward the center where the image is (Inspiration). In this sense, the answers arrive in a way similar to the way we know the ideas that are expressed in the sealed letter that we wrote. In Imagination this process is still not that direct. Here the images still meet us as envelopes that we behold mainly in their imaginative content without much awareness of the intuitive intents that inspire the forms (actually in much of what we behold in Imagination our Angel is the creative force).

The key is that the vividness of imagination will come naturally in time. This is the same topic as the 'three kinds of clairvoyance'. If we set it as our goal, we can most easily achieve gut clairvoyance, which is astonishingly vivid and colorful. It's the same with psychedelics. Yet all these experiences are sealed envelopes. And as explained, the intuition of the hidden text doesn't come by imaginatively opening the letters (crack opening the visions) and reading there, but by aligning with the Inspired intuitions that give meaning to the sealed letters, even though they are not opened (just like we know the meaning of our sealed letter).

Our whole phenomenological experience is one such envelope. The secrets of the living Universe are concealed in it. They are written and continue to be written by all the hierarchies. Thus when we concentrate on it can become the center of the Cosmic Mandala that will receive its meaning from the opposite direction, by Inspiration and Intuition, by resonating with the meaningful ideal ensembles of the hierarchies.

[Lou Gold]

This expectation for the image itself to be the source of more exoteric perceptions and deeper insights could be heightened if we have a rich visualization capacity to begin with. In that case, we may more easily lose sight of the intuitive gestures that are made in the process of concentration, the delicate sensitivity of our concentrated activity to the nudges of the various soul grooves in which it flows. In that way, 'visualize' is more about intuitively sensing the ideas and feelings associated with our concentrated state than it is about focusing on vivid perceptual details. If we start out with a weak visualization capacity to begin with, the etheric layer of holistic imaginations we eventually reach may be all the more richer and meaningful since we have grown sensitive to the fine intuitive gestures of our soul life.

I'm surprised by this take, since for concentration it's nonetheless necessary to be able to create and hold a mental image. Even more so for the first of Steiner's subsidiary exercises, or the ones in the Seer's Handbook. If the inability is as stated - that is a complete impossibility to create or recreate a picture in one's mind's eye - I would see it as a definitive obstacle to spiritual development. (As I said, I know that people tend to be sentimentally attached to their diagnoses, and I am skeptical that the impossibility to visualize is really as categorical as described).

It occurred to me that probably we can get a good idea of the purpose of meditation by thinking about a letter . We can imagine this very vividly. We can write down on a sheet of paper certain ideas, even some intimate things from our feeling life. Then we put the paper in an envelope and seal it. Now we can place this letter somewhere and anytime our gaze glances over it, it acts as a rich symbol that anchors everything that we have expressed there. We should really try to feel how practically nothing of these things can be seen by just staring at the sealed letter. This is precisely the healthy mood in meditation.

We can really use this symbol in meditation. We can imagine how we put there everything we have read here or in all books. This is a tremendous amount of text but we can magically fit it in the envelope. Yet all this text only serves a purpose if it connects with our living experience, just like the words through which we have laid down our feelings, connect to our soul life. Then we can go even further and imagine that there's much more text that takes form inside the letter as our consciousness expands into the Cosmos.

From this perspective it should be easier to see how the vividness in which we imagine the envelope in meditation is completely secondary. Even if we can visualize it in photorealistic vividness, we still can't see anything of what is written inside. What's inside comes from the opposite direction, so to speak.

For example, we may struggle with some deep question. We can imagine that the answer is already in the envelope but it will become apparent to us only if it descends from the periphery, through us, toward the center where the image is (Inspiration). In this sense, the answers arrive in a way similar to the way we know the ideas that are expressed in the sealed letter that we wrote. In Imagination this process is still not that direct. Here the images still meet us as envelopes that we behold mainly in their imaginative content without much awareness of the intuitive intents that inspire the forms (actually in much of what we behold in Imagination our Angel is the creative force).

The key is that the vividness of imagination will come naturally in time. This is the same topic as the 'three kinds of clairvoyance'. If we set it as our goal, we can most easily achieve gut clairvoyance, which is astonishingly vivid and colorful. It's the same with psychedelics. Yet all these experiences are sealed envelopes. And as explained, the intuition of the hidden text doesn't come by imaginatively opening the letters (crack opening the visions) and reading there, but by aligning with the Inspired intuitions that give meaning to the sealed letters, even though they are not opened (just like we know the meaning of our sealed letter).

Our whole phenomenological experience is one such envelope. The secrets of the living Universe are concealed in it. They are written and continue to be written by all the hierarchies. Thus when we concentrate on it can become the center of the Cosmic Mandala that will receive its meaning from the opposite direction, by Inspiration and Intuition, by resonating with the meaningful ideal ensembles of the hierarchies.

From this perspective it should be easier to see how the vividness in which we imagine the envelope in meditation is completely secondary. Even if we can visualize it in photorealistic vividness, we still can't see anything of what is written inside. What's inside comes from the opposite direction, so to speak.

I get it Cleric. It's fun to express a plausible view from the other side (even partially). Here, I'm imaging plant intelligence (photosynthesis) aa the tool through which light becomes life. Yes, I did not 'pictorially' view it in a 'literal' way, ('literal' meaning 'following the letter') but, as scripture says, "In the beginning was the Word."

Perhaps, I might call this "Emergence."

[Cleric K]

From this perspective it should be easier to see how the vividness in which we imagine the envelope in meditation is completely secondary. Even if we can visualize it in photorealistic vividness, we still can't see anything of what is written inside. What's inside comes from the opposite direction, so to speak.

I get it Cleric. It's fun to express a plausible view from the other side (even partially). Here, I'm imaging plant intelligence (photosynthesis) aa the tool through which light becomes life. Yes, I did not 'pictorially' view it in a 'literal' way, ('literal' meaning 'following the letter') but, as scripture says, "In the beginning was the Word."

Perhaps, I might call this "Emergence."

Thanks Lou,

Light becoming life is indeed one of the richest topics to grow with. It's not only a physical fact but it reflects the underlying spiritual reality - the Light of the Unlimited Idea, given Life through the Word, becomes the innerly beheld phenomenal Form of the World.

Actually, I was just thinking about you. I wanted to greet you with a song, then I saw that you have written.

[Lou Gold]

From this perspective it should be easier to see how the vividness in which we imagine the envelope in meditation is completely secondary. Even if we can visualize it in photorealistic vividness, we still can't see anything of what is written inside. What's inside comes from the opposite direction, so to speak.

I get it Cleric. It's fun to express a plausible view from the other side (even partially). Here, I'm imaging plant intelligence (photosynthesis) aa the tool through which light becomes life. Yes, I did not 'pictorially' view it in a 'literal' way, ('literal' meaning 'following the letter') but, as scripture says, "In the beginning was the Word."

Perhaps, I might call this "Emergence."

Thanks Lou,

Light becoming life is indeed one of the richest topics to grow with. It's not only a physical fact but it reflects the underlying spiritual reality - the Light of the Unlimited Idea, given Life through the Word, becomes the innerly beheld phenomenal Form of the World.

Actually, I was just thinking about you. I wanted to greet you with a song, then I saw that you have written.

Thanks for the song Cleric.

You might appreciate this very 'literal' example of 'pictorial thinking' in the Incredibly brilliant piece of calligraphic art made by Polish artist Barbara Galińska.

[Lou Gold]

I'm experiencing an out-flowing of associations with this 'pictorial thinking' theme. Not making a profound statement but surely enjoying the process. Here's an old photo of me and a recent song by Jacob Collier...