Therian Guide: Forums

(2021-02-08 3:09)Atlantis Wrote: [ -> ]We also think non-verbally. That has happened to me at times during very intense shifts. And thus we are not able to understand such complex technical subjects. When I was younger and very deep in thought I would sometimes accidentally switch over to this way of thinking. It was usually uneventful, but occasionally if I was snapped out of it suddenly I wouldn't immediately regain my ability to understand language or speak. One of these times it was my teacher talking to me. I understood she was someone important, even a mentor figure. I was afraid because I was aware she was trying to communicate with me and she was important and I couldn't understand her. Until I snapped out of it after around a minute I wasn't able to conceptualize what a teacher was. My feelings were more powerful without an understanding of complex ideas and I relied on emotions and impressions to think. I don't think it's worse, or that animals are stupid because of it though. When I think without words I find I have a much deeper emotional understanding of the world around me verbal language can't express.

I've experienced similar things, I definitely agree with what you're saying. And in particular, talking about feelings being more powerful, or having a much deeper emotional understanding of the world, I think... there is a temptation to consider the more "esoteric" emotions, the sorts of things that might appear in The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows, as being particularly keyed to verbal language and "higher-order" thought. But I don't think that's true. That dictionary is impressive particularly because they're emotions people feel and recognize and, until someone else put it into words for them, did not know how to describe or that they were things other people shared. Experiencing things while thinking non-verbally, we still experience very complex feelings and emotions. Those don't necessarily belong in the realm of the "sapient" or "human" or whatever just because they're complex

(2021-02-08 4:54)kaiyoht Wrote: [ -> ]I've experienced similar things, I definitely agree with what you're saying. And in particular, talking about feelings being more powerful, or having a much deeper emotional understanding of the world, I think... there is a temptation to consider the more "esoteric" emotions, the sorts of things that might appear in The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows, as being particularly keyed to verbal language and "higher-order" thought. But I don't think that's true. That dictionary is impressive particularly because they're emotions people feel and recognize and, until someone else put it into words for them, did not know how to describe or that they were things other people shared. Experiencing things while thinking non-verbally, we still experience very complex feelings and emotions. Those don't necessarily belong in the realm of the "sapient" or "human" or whatever just because they're complex

I'd like to note that given what I said before about the thinking I'd done a few years previous breaking up emotions into those that are 'base' that all are capable of versus 'complex' which I said were possibly better facilitated be language, you've given me some food for thought as to whether it's really necessary to have words to get to such nuanced states.

Is it possible to try and explain in words what it's like to be experiencing or processing complex emotions without words to make what those are a response to concisely grasped?

I've been focused on 'finding the words' for a very long time.

(2021-02-08 6:21)Autumne Wrote: [ -> ]Is it possible to try and explain in words what it's like to be experiencing or processing complex emotions without words to make what those are a response to concisely grasped?

I've been focused on 'finding the words' for a very long time.

I feel like to some degree this is *why* we tell stories, you know? It's not that the words we say describe the emotion we're experiencing directly, but rather that we try to paint a picture for the other person and engage their empathy to it. Because verbal language can't quite convey those emotions the same way.

(2021-02-08 6:21)Autumne Wrote: [ -> ]I'd like to note that given what I said before about the thinking I'd done a few years previous breaking up emotions into those that are 'base' that all are capable of versus 'complex' which I said were possibly better facilitated be language, you've given me some food for thought as to whether it's really necessary to have words to get to such nuanced states.

Is it possible to try and explain in words what it's like to be experiencing or processing complex emotions without words to make what those are a response to concisely grasped?

I've been focused on 'finding the words' for a very long time.

I think one of the differences at least that I experienced with non-verbal language is that if you were to experience a complex emotion...I don't really know how to explain this right but it's harder to hold on to exactly what it was like. Because it's just part of your thought process and because you don't have the complex vocabulary to match it to. I think this also happens to emotions we don't have words for yet even if we're thinking in "higher order" thought.
One incident for me was a deep emotional understanding of a bush I was thinking about. Made perfect sense in non-verbal language but I have no way to verbalize it beyond what I just said. I can't even come close to gaining that same emotional understanding because I'm thinking in technically understanding. In verbal language I guess you could say I know more about the bush, including a decent array of scientific data. However in non-verbal language I still felt like I understood it better.

(2021-02-08 8:07)kaiyoht Wrote: [ -> ]I feel like to some degree this is *why* we tell stories, you know? It's not that the words we say describe the emotion we're experiencing directly, but rather that we try to paint a picture for the other person and engage their empathy to it. Because verbal language can't quite convey those emotions the same way.

Absolutely. Any long discussion with me about anything generally eventually gets to me explaining a variety of metaphors or giving examples from pieces of media I've consumed. "It's like... Remember how in x, y happened, so z?" I guess I've still thought of that as being words but... It isn't really.

This makes a lot of sense.

(2021-02-08 12:59)Atlantis Wrote: [ -> ]I think one of the differences at least that I experienced with non-verbal language is that if you were to experience a complex emotion...I don't really know how to explain this right but it's harder to hold on to exactly what it was like. Because it's just part of your thought process and because you don't have the complex vocabulary to match it to. I think this also happens to emotions we don't have words for yet even if we're thinking in "higher order" thought.
One incident for me was a deep emotional understanding of a bush I was thinking about. Made perfect sense in non-verbal language but I have no way to verbalize it beyond what I just said. I can't even come close to gaining that same emotional understanding because I'm thinking in technically understanding. In verbal language I guess you could say I know more about the bush, including a decent array of scientific data. However in non-verbal language I still felt like I understood it better.

Hmm, yeah that's something to think about too. It's hard for me to remind myself or put myself back into those states. Usually if I do end up remembering a complex emotion like that, it's not something I intentionally did, it just kinda happens. Kinda like the way a dream fades away if I don't write it down right when I wake up -- but randomly I might have a flash of something and remember "Oh yeah, that was in my dream". And being able to focus in on... even if "telling the story" of a emotion is how you try to remember it or share it, you want to be able to cut to the core of what actually was important and relevant there, and skip all the bits that didn't really have anything to do with the emotion. To understand what was the most relevant parts, there still has to be some level of like... being able to abstractly reason about the emotion and its context, and I think that might require verbal language in some capacity.

(2021-02-08 15:58)Autumne Wrote: [ -> ]Absolutely. Any long discussion with em about anything generally eventually gets to me explaining a variety of metaphors or giving examples from pieces of media I've consumed. "It's like... Remember how in x, y happened, so z?" I guess I've still thought of that as being words but... It isn't really.

This makes a lot of sense.

Not to get too meta with references/metaphors, but have you ever seen the episode "Darmok" from Star Trek: TNG? This kinda reminds me of that, especially in how difficult it can be to understand very metaphor-dense language if you're not expecting it or don't have a similar base of knowledge to draw reference from.

(2021-02-09 3:10)kaiyoht Wrote: [ -> ]

(2021-02-08 12:59)Atlantis Wrote: [ -> ]I think one of the differences at least that I experienced with non-verbal language is that if you were to experience a complex emotion...I don't really know how to explain this right but it's harder to hold on to exactly what it was like. Because it's just part of your thought process and because you don't have the complex vocabulary to match it to. I think this also happens to emotions we don't have words for yet even if we're thinking in "higher order" thought.
One incident for me was a deep emotional understanding of a bush I was thinking about. Made perfect sense in non-verbal language but I have no way to verbalize it beyond what I just said. I can't even come close to gaining that same emotional understanding because I'm thinking in technically understanding. In verbal language I guess you could say I know more about the bush, including a decent array of scientific data. However in non-verbal language I still felt like I understood it better.

Hmm, yeah that's something to think about too. It's hard for me to remind myself or put myself back into those states. Usually if I do end up remembering a complex emotion like that, it's not something I intentionally did, it just kinda happens. Kinda like the way a dream fades away if I don't write it down right when I wake up -- but randomly I might have a flash of something and remember "Oh yeah, that was in my dream". And being able to focus in on... even if "telling the story" of a emotion is how you try to remember it or share it, you want to be able to cut to the core of what actually was important and relevant there, and skip all the bits that didn't really have anything to do with the emotion. To understand what was the most relevant parts, there still has to be some level of like... being able to abstractly reason about the emotion and its context, and I think that might require verbal language in some capacity.

(2021-02-08 15:58)Autumne Wrote: [ -> ]Absolutely. Any long discussion with em about anything generally eventually gets to me explaining a variety of metaphors or giving examples from pieces of media I've consumed. "It's like... Remember how in x, y happened, so z?" I guess I've still thought of that as being words but... It isn't really.

This makes a lot of sense.

Not to get too meta with references/metaphors, but have you ever seen the episode "Darmok" from Star Trek: TNG? This kinda reminds me of that, especially in how difficult it can be to understand very metaphor-dense language if you're not expecting it or don't have a similar base of knowledge to draw reference from.

I do not remember that one but I should go find it. Depending on the day, that episode will either be a humorous roast of me at my 'deepest' or just an amusingly relatable tale.

(2021-02-06 21:12)DustWolf Wrote: [ -> ]For example, as a wolf therian I don't experience my wolf therianthropy making me aggressive or powerful or any of the ways in which humans see wolves. I experience it as the timid and shy nature that is actually characteristic of wolves! I know this because I'm one of them and I feel the way they feel. I mean obviously none of us really knows what an other person, much less an animal, is thinking, but: I understand wolves from the inside out. When scientists discover something new about wolves, it usually confirms how I always felt.

Wolves seem timid when observed by humans, but what if they're in the natural habitat? I doubt wolves are timid/shy when defending their territory or taking down prey. Also consider that "Highly Sensitive People" might be perceived as being timid/shy. In fact it's because their more sensitive nervous systems are processing more information than other people, which takes more time, and they're also more prone to getting overstimulated which they want to avoid. So it's a matter of judgement/interpretation. Maybe you're not "timid," but your "sensory/empathetic volume control" setting is more sensitive than most humans which would make you feel timid and out of place.

Quote:As an AI developer, I can tell you that in the next few years when people start tackling the idea of actually creating human-like AI: Those bots will be very emotional, they will actually appear affectionate, like how we see domestic pets. Because the capacity for attachment is a necessary step towards intelligence. And after all, machines have chemical batteries that behave kind of like we do, they are slow when cold and active when warm, electronics characteristics change depending on environmental factors -- they "feel better" when they are comfortable.

If someone was in a sense a machine therian, they would know these things. They wouldn't feel like what Hollywood inaccurately portrays machines as, which is almost universal in machine-kin otherkin.

I'm skeptical that attachment is necessary step towards intelligence because there are highly intelligent people with antisocial/psychopath traits who are "successful" by worldly standards that define success as the acquisition of wealth and power. I speculate AI could be either very emotional or not at all depending on their development, adaptation, etc.

But we are meat machines, right? I think "machine kin" are using this label to convey their particular experience of feeling non-human. I sometimes feel machine-like just with the way I have observed and described the workings of the mind in a way that's sometimes unsettling to others because I'm less concerned with ideas like "soul," lol. I don't distinguish so much between the physical and the spiritual like many people do.