The "inner dialogue" is called the default mode network in neuroscience. It doesn't have to be thinking in "words" necessarily; you could also skip the words and still be thinking in a resting state. It serves the purpose of ruminating, reflecting on memories, doing introspection. Paradoxically, your brain actually consumes more calories doing this type of resting thinking than you do in task-oriented thought, like when you're replacing a broken pipe or solving a leetcode challenge. Depressed people tend to have too much default mode network activity.
I think it's maladaptive. You are better off having no default mode network activity.
Of course it's another thing entirely if you're too stupid to have an inner dialogue, verbal or not, but I feel like even non-human animals are capable of an inner dialogue. It doesn't add anything useful.
> I think it's maladaptive. You are better off having no default mode network activity.
> Of course it's another thing entirely if you're too stupid to have an inner dialogue, verbal or not, but I feel like even non-human animals are capable of an inner dialogue. It doesn't add anything useful.
With all due respect, I disagree completely . I think it's incredibly helpful to be able to talk to yourself and examine ideas and concepts verbally without having to physically verbalize.
Not having the ability to "talk" to yourself (either in words or in the abstractions that underlie the words) is a different issue. That is a serious handicap.
What I'm criticizing is having this going on all the time--constantly ruminating at rest except when attention is focused on some high-bandwidth task.
With all due respect, rumination is a well known symptom of depression and depressed people's internal dialogue tends to be warped in negative thinking patterns.
>I think it's maladaptive. You are better off having no default mode network activity.
I vehemently disagree. Introspection from normal mode activity is a critical source for self improvement and creativity. Yes, it can be hyperactive, but some degree of introspection is one of the primary qualities that differentiate us from animals and make us decidedly human.
I'm not saying introspection is bad. Introspection should be siloed off into its own activity. Constantly doing it involuntarily makes you a slave to your own mind.
I'm pretty sure non-human animals can daydream too. It isn't what makes us special as humans. We are special because we have thumbs and can do math.
Granted, you will probably lose out on creativity (in the messy, artistic sense) by shutting off the default mode network. But again, you can silo creativity into its own brainstorming session.
If you think you are having no default mode activity, you are likely fooling yourself. It is externally observable when humans have a quieter default mode, through subtleties of behavior, one can notice a calming presence, like that of non-linguistic animals. Even without language, default processing loops can be quite complex, not even taking into account multiple diverse parallel processes. Inner dialog can be very useful. Not having inner dialog is not stupid. I agree though, that in many situations, or for some people, default mode inner dialog can have a debilitating effect. But in an evolutionary way, thinking "I can survive" in a perilous situation, likely outweighs thinking "wtf I am I doing w/ my life?" when sitting on the couch. But consider the evolutionary effects of the modern externalization of inner dialog through devices.
> But in an evolutionary way, thinking "I can survive" in a perilous situation, likely outweighs thinking "wtf I am I doing w/ my life?"
My hypothesis is that the inner dialog genes proliferated by providing higher status. People with an inner dialog are more likely to be charismatic, entertaining, etc. because they are constantly practicing without knowing it. Think the prehistoric version of a big account on twitter. I can't imagine it's possible to become a successful writer, elected politician, or a war general without having internal dialog genes.
The externalization via devices will just magnify this effect.
Whenever something is highly selected for in isolation, there tends to be a long tail of unforeseen consequences. (See: sickle cell.) Some people will have too much of it and end up with some type of schizophrenia or schizoid state that puts them in fake dream worlds. If you get a lot of these people together in a room, you could make them believe some crazy stuff with the same conviction as ours in gravity. (How religion started?)
I think it's maladaptive. You are better off having no default mode network activity.
Of course it's another thing entirely if you're too stupid to have an inner dialogue, verbal or not, but I feel like even non-human animals are capable of an inner dialogue. It doesn't add anything useful.