That's not an accurate interpretation. In my case, I think "fully formed thoughts in rapid succession, sometimes colliding and in competition with one another" is more accurate. However, sometimes it does resemble a conversation as you start to reason through scenarios using game theory.
Seeing your other comment, it isn't just seeing imagery in my mind's eye, although that's possible, it's the ability to quickly construct fully formed models as well as receive a rapid series of fully formed thoughts almost faster than I can do anything with them, which is where practice in managing that firehouse of information becomes useful.
So you don't experience any of this? The speed at which my brain works is probably faster than yours. The synapses supposedly fire faster. To me it's kind of a superpower that allows me to do amazing things for people, so I obviously have fun with it. But I have learned how to manage it and maximize the potential.
I think you're right. I've often found that I'm way slower than others when it comes to coming up with answers on the spot (except for mental math, where lack of visualizing seems to be a major advantage for some reason - I think I just don't get confused as easily). I'm really bad at conversation and not witty at all, but I often find that I get to better answers in less than time overall, but my time to first answer is a lot longer.
In some ways what I have is a disability. My nervous system can easily get overstimulated with too much information, which precipitates an adrenaline dump that shuts down my body. Speaking in front of crowds, looking at all those faces with all that information bombarding me, will do it. So it definitely has downsides which I know that I have to avoid.
I know what I sound like to myself. I know what other people sound like to me. I've heard probably millions of voices in my lifetime by now.
So I can basically imagine a conversation between myself and others or an entirely fictitious entity. And it's like a memory that never happened. (I mean, as much as any memory actually happened.)
Ghosts as portrayed in movies are actually a highly realistic view of the common man's imagination from the first person. That's what it looks like to them, so you know. They're usually people because that's what matters most is people spesh the face that's like who they are in a 2D projection, they're imagined because the real person is not there anymore, they're not colored in first because that's work for their limited imagination, plus it interferes with the "imaginary" marker, plus they generally don't realize they're not seeing things colored in, that's something the movie producer only realizes because he's trying to sell tickets. Also because in white societies the last image the living have of the dead are their paleness--in white societies primarily, so Europe and Asia which dominate cultural exports--so they are imagined as they were last seen. That will always be the latest version of their face.
.
Then there's what I call "macro-phantasia" which is like, like a video game with perfect graphics at this point. It is a gift and a curse. As though there were a difference between gifts and curses. Overboard.
.
Because in fact aphantasia prevents you from certain forms of harm, like imagining yourself in terrible places as people are wont to threaten you with. Threats of like "place worse than you can imagine" that's so you turn your imagination on to the max, and harm yourself in your own imagination to coerce yourself to their bidding with no proof it ever happened. If you can't imagine that, guess what, police interrogation is a waste of time even for the policeman on time-and-a-half, you didn't cooperate and that's it, or the gang-land interrogation equivalent, what side you're on is in this case irrelevant. It helps against coercion.
.
Aphantasia. Curse and a gift.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/aug/21/science...