ABSTRACT
Whereas in everyday life imagination is commonly accepted as a specific mental state, postulating a mental and a corresponding neural faculty for provision of this competence is controversial in psychological science. This is even more the case if a specific format of mental representation (e.g., a depiction instead of a description — see below) is postulated. One reason for this is the fact that imagery is exclusively a personal experience. Any report on the qualities of a mental image is therefore ultimately grounded in introspective data that cannot be approached via direct empirical observation. It is therefore quite understandable that one looked to neuroscientific methods to increasingly disclose the state of imagery, as these promised a better understanding of imagery and perhaps a proof of the existence of such a neural faculty and the depictive format. However, as I show in the following, this is still — at least partially — an unfulfilled desire.
