|
|
|
|
|
by dumbo-octopus
912 days ago
|
|
One interesting thing to consider is the "draw a bicycle" test. When presented to a population of phantastics, many will produce severely flawed bikes that could never exist in real life, yet they will claim that it matches the "image" they have in their head of one. However in my own experience despite being aphantasic I can very easily draw a physically accurate bike, not by rendering to paper the "picture" in my head, but rather by working from first principles about how the components of a bike have to interact. |
|
Many years ago, I drew the opposite conclusion: that people that cannot draw also cannot picture the image of what they want to draw. My informal quiz confirmed my suspicions, but it has one serious flaw that completely undermines it:
I am a decent (if untrained) artist. I can say I draw well. I can also picture things in my mind very vividly.
However, I cannot draw horses. I can see them in my mind clearly -- as I type this, a realistic brown horse popped in my mind -- but if I try to draw it, it will look like a badly drawn dog. Drawing horses requires a theoretical understanding of their anatomy, it would seem.
I still think most people who cannot draw also cannot imagine the subject. With exceptions.