this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2025
200 points (100.0% liked)

Showerthoughts

35740 readers
1282 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago

Up to as much as more than half of all people.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 15 hours ago

Maybe its cause they have baths?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 15 hours ago

I for once have an outer monologue. Makes for awkward moments whenever my SO hears me...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 17 hours ago

Buddy you can just think out loud in the shower, nobody will stop you. For that matter you can think I got a lot pretty much anywhere, though you do get looks in the grocery store I find.

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Lack of inner monologue doesn’t mean lack of thoughts. People without an inner monologue just don’t think in words. They can still think up concepts and ideas like everyone else.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (6 children)

As someone with an inner monologue, how do they think?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I don't really have an inner monologue unless I very intentionally think in words. Otherwise I just think in thoughts. 🤷‍♀️

[–] [email protected] 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Thoughts are words though?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

When you're thinking about how to throw a basketball to get it through a hoop, do you use words for that?

When you are thinking of the tune to a particular song, is that in words?

I think a lot of people overestimate the role of words in thinking. There's a lot of non-verbal thought.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

I do both of those using auditory words. Can't imagine any other way and didn't know anyone else could function so differently.

Aiming a basketball: Ok let's get this in, a little higher, to the left, ok looks good.

Thinking of music: what's the lyrics to that song, I think they were....

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Really! I find that fascinating.

When I try to think of a tune (often because I haven't recalled the lyrics yet and am still trying to identify the song), I am just listening to the song in my head, trying to think of the notes and instrumentation of the next bit. I hear it, like a recording.

When I try to throw something--I said basketball because I figured it would be more relatable, but the sport I actually played was Ultimate (Frisbee, but that's a trademark, so the sport is just Ultimate)--I'm picturing the path of the disc, how it will arc on the wind, the precise angle, how to roll it off my fingers, how long it will be in the air and how far to lead the runner. It's a struggle to even come up with words for it now. It all feels visceral, the same as thinking how to reach my hand out to touch a glass on a table.

It's hard for me to imagine using words for those kinds of things because words are so vague and general. Words deal with categories we impose on the world, rather than the world as it is. Like, I learned to juggle as a teenager; I could never do that if I had to use words to think about every way to maneuver my arms and how the balls would land and so forth. I just have to reach where the ball is going to be, and throw where my hand is going to be. When I first learned Mills' Mess, I got it mixed up a bit (because I was learning from a VHS tape), and I had an extra throw in there. It took me quite a while to figure out how I mixed it up, and how to do it without that extra throw. But it was a spatial puzzle. I wouldn't even know how to convey the issue in detail without just doing it.

I dunno. I shouldn't be surprised that people's inner lives are very different, but this particular point confounds me a bit.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 15 hours ago

Thoughts can be words.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (2 children)

I just think in concepts/abstractions, I don't know how to explain it, lol.

I definitely don't think in pictures, like other person said. My mind can't create pictures out of thin air. That might be more like artists think I guess.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago

Having a minds eye or not is a different thing from having a inner monologue or not. People can have both, one of it or none.

Lack of an inner eye is called Aphantasia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphantasia

I have a inner monologue but not a glimpse of an inner eye.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 16 hours ago

I am very very much not an artist, and yet also cannot imagine not being able to conjure up images of whatever.

It is fascinating how the brain works! Even if we barely understand it!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago

What everyone else here said but also keep in mind it's not binary.

If you ask me to picture an Apple on a windowsill I can kind of do that. And then if you ask me to make it polka dot, I could kind of do that. In my mind's eye though it's like it's severely myopic. It's not fuzzy but the details are not there.

When I'm drawing things, the act of me putting the marks on the paper is where the object is formed. I generally don't have a solid concept in my head that's coming out on paper. I could definitely do the 2D outline of an apple, But if you want me to perspective skew it there's no way. I might be able to draw the 2D outline and then slowly modify that to make it look more 3D, But I've got to be making changes to something already on paper rather than having something come out that's just kind of the right direction.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 20 hours ago

With imagery, or in abstracts. I have an internal monologue but not everything is a monologue. If I'm working on a project of some kind I'll usually keep a mental model of the current piece I'm working on in my head. There's no monologue attached, it's just a "working copy" of my current task.

Or for example if I'm reaching somewhere I can't see to plug in a usb port or something I'm visualizing in my head what my hand is doing, but I'm not talking myself through it.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

In pictures, for one example

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago

This is the best example, thank you.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 19 hours ago

There was a thread on r/SamHarris (maybe 2 years ago) where some people without inner monologue answered questions. It was interesting to read.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 day ago

Conservatives explained.

[–] [email protected] 52 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Just because you don't have an inner monologue doesn't mean you are incapable of thought, or showerthoughts if we're getting specific

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Correct, a lack of inner speech isn't the same as an absence of thought

It just seems like a true shower thought requires a narration to get so incredibly off tangent that it amounts to more than a simple epiphany

Like Mitch Hedberg, he is a great example of someone who let their inner speech run free

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago

https://mander.xyz/post/20289088

I'd still argue against that. I've had one true showerthought and it didn't manifest as monologue, even though I do have an internal monologue. I had a concept and images for it. I spent some time trying to put it into words.

I still don't see how a showerthought (or any thought) has to have a verbal origin in the thinker's mind; I would argue any internal monologue is but a secondary step after a thought has occurred. I've never heard of anyone being unable to predict what their own internal monologue is saying, and I've never heard of anyone being unable to make quick decisions because they had to first hear a command in their minds.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Google gave me mostly AI slop and pop psychology, but this article is an in-depth summary of the literature on the topic of inner speech, for anyone interested (and dedicated - it’s long and very technical).

It doesn’t seem to justify dichotomizing people into those who “have it” and those who don’t. Research looks mostly focused on what cognitive or developmental purpose it serves.

Inner speech can be defined as the subjective experience of language in the absence of overt and audible articulation. This definition is necessarily simplistic: as the following will demonstrate, experiences of this kind vary widely in their phenomenology, their addressivity to others, their relation to the self, and their similarity to external speech.

So, it’s on a spectrum, highly subjective, and difficult to talk about with precision.

I personally do not normally think in words, but I certainly rehearse/relive conversations. I also complain to myself with words when I am really miserable, I think it’s comforting to “say it out loud” (inside). Do I have an inner monologue?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

A spectrum is what I'm thinking. Some people can turn it on or off at will. Complete silence or make it yap yap yap. At least that's my case.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

You just described how you monologue like a villian in your head, so yeah you're monologueing xD

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago

I process thoughts visually, as typed text. It’s like a fucking ticker tape when I get going having random thoughts and I definitely experience shower thoughts.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

Tangentially related, but the fox game show “1% club” is, perhaps unintentionally, a fascinating demonstration of how vastly different people think through logic problems.

The premise is the contestants go through a series of questions already asked to a sample of Americans and progress in order of how “difficult” they are based on how many got them wrong.

The interesting part comes when there can be a significant gap in what I perceive the difficulty to be between questions. Sometimes I may have trouble with an “easy” one but get a significantly “tougher” one no problem.

It seems like lunacy to me, but all it really means most times is the format or mechanics of the logic needed for the answer is just more natural to me than the majority of the sample.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I refuse to believe this statistic. The only way to study this is by asking people and I bet most simply aren't aware that they do have it. I didn't pay much attention to it either untill I started meditating and now I'm painfully aware of it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

In addition to in-depth interviews, one of the primary methods used in the study was for volunteers to carry a timer that would go off randomly and they were to journal what they were thinking at the time

The thoughts of someone without an inner monologue are not the same as someone with an inner monologue

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Do people without an inner monologue "hear" the words they read as they read them?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

I do in monotonous "voice", yeah. Unless I know what voice somebody could have, then I use that voice instead. Usually happens when character that appears in the book also is portrayed by some actor in a movie or a video game.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Many people do not hear as they read. In fact the skill of speed-reading depends on turning the auditory experience off:

There are three types of reading:

  • Subvocalization: sounding out each word internally, as reading to oneself. This is the slowest form of reading.
  • Auditory reading: hearing out the read words. This is a faster process.
  • Visual reading: understanding the meaning of the word, rather than sounding or hearing. This is the fastest process.

Subvocalization readers (Mental readers) generally read at approximately 250 words per minute, auditory readers at approximately 450 words per minute and visual readers at approximately 700 words per minute. Proficient readers are able to read 280–350 wpm without compromising comprehension.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_reading

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nice. I'm definitely in the auditory reading category. I tend to just pick out the key words in a sentence when I am trying to read faster.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 20 hours ago

As a child and into my teens, I had an inner monologue that was switched on all the time. After practising meditation and reading without subvocalisation, I was finally able to 'shut up' where stopping the monologue was as easy as stopping talking. Anyway, I'd encourage anyone to give it a try. Now being able to think without distracting chatter is well worth it for me.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

I distinctly recall thinking inner monologues were a "neat idea" after seeing them on TV as a child and thinking it would be a useful skill to learn. I never did though

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

... Are you suggesting we are incapable of thought? My mind wanders just like anyone else's.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wait am I confused on what an inner monologue is? Is it different from a train of thought? Do I just think I have one? Do people have a non metaphorical inner monologue where they physically hear thoughts? What percent are they in control of the thoughts?

If your mind wanders, isn't that the inner monologue?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The inner monologue is thinking by 'hearing' your own voice 'speaking' in your mind. It's the mental equivalent of literally talking to yourself.

Do people have a non metaphorical inner monologue where they physically hear thoughts?

Yes, in the sense that they hear themselves 'voicing' out their own thoughts. If you have the ability to form images in your mind, it's like that, but with sound.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You don't have to. It's a thoroughly researched study, your belief in its existence is irrelevant.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

I think you are completely misrepresenting the literature in the field. There has been decades of research on inner monologues, but whether anyone truly has no inner monologue is still a matter of debate, and suggesting that it could be as much as 50% is absolutely wild.

One recent example is Nedergaard and Lupyan (2024), who used questionnaires on 1,037 participants and found no one who reported a complete lack of inner speech. They did show a link between lower frequency of internal speech and lower performance on sole verbal cognitive tasks.

But this was frequently misreported in popular science news, which may be where you got the idea. For example, Science Daily's headline "People without an inner voice have poorer verbal memory" and subheading "Between 5-10 per cent of the population do not experience an inner voice" certainly make some bold claims (although still well below your "up to 50%" statistic). But just a few lines into the article it's been rephrase as "between 5-10 per cent of the population do not have the same experience of an inner voice". This is more accurate, as all studies agree that there is a variety of experiences of inner voices / monologues, but a different experience is not the same as an absence.

In another comment you make reference to the experience sampling study (where a buzzer would sound and participants would record whether they were experiencing an inner monologue) which I assume is the work of Heavey and Hurlburt. It's true that they claim that 5 of their 30 participants recorded no instances of inner voice, but let's be clear about what the experimental procedure was: the participant would turn on the buzzer, which would buzz at a random time (an average of every 30 minutes) and the study was based on two periods of five samples. So, ten data points collected over approx five hours.

Even people with strong inner monologues report different frequencies of inner speech depending on their activities. Many people do not experience inner speech when actively engaging in other verbal activity - talking with friends, watching a video; while quiet focused activities such as golf show much higher reporting of inner speech. So the absence for five individuals of any inner speech during those ten particular samples is in no sense equievlant to "16% of peole have no inner monologue". Indeed even the study's authors acknowledge "it is possible that these participants may all have actually had quite similar inner experiences; it is merely the reports of those experiences that differed."

Tldr: I think you're making some very wild claims about this subject, without posting sources. No significant study I know of claims that any sizable percentage of the population have no inner voice, (although there certainly is an interesting variety in how frequent and clearly it is experienced.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

I was today years old when I learned that many people don't have an inner monologue. The human body is so fascinating.

Oddly enough, if I don't take my ADHD meds, I tend to talk to myself out loud a lot because my inner monologue gets kind of "muffled" in the "noise" and I rely on it very heavily to think through.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›