"Years ago, while with Mangyan tribesmen I concluded that these hill people could read an alphabet unknown to me. The foliage, sounds, the shift in airs, scents -- all of these -- spoke to them as directly as words in a book, though I scarcely imagined how. Later I discovered that psychologist Julian Jaynes had advanced the theory of the bicameral mind, which helped explain what I'd seen. His book, the Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind suggests that our ancestors were instructed by voices and visions.
...
They are the end result of a logical process inaccessible to the waking mind. My own hunch is that in the last two or three months there's been a change in the tone of the blogosphere."
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/

An interesting article by wretchard. The topic of the difference between thought is more interesting. I would point out the obvious, that people minds will reflect their environment. Meaning that if 99.9% of knowledge is transferred via spoken word, then it seems reasonable that mind will hear voices, whereas if knowledge is gained mostly through listening & looking to environment, ones mind is going have tendency "communicate" in these type of terms- vision and sounds.
And if you are mostly reading text, one supposely thinks in terms of text- or least in similar format- such as introduction, body, conclusions, argumentive, logical, etc. Also instead something fundemental going in the mind's processes, there also that which what could be described as more superfical fads and styles which overlay, reforce, and feedback. Obviously if our culture shifts from away from text, and more of some kind of multimedia type communication this will affect how our mind "apparently" functions and how we see and talk about our world.