Do you hear your own audible voice when you think?

[Chesterton]

The my playing environments....I dont always start the song......Singers start and I must be able to find the key and then proceed to play the song from memory of that key.....if the song is known. If the song is not known.....I must continue to match the harmonies until the song is sung once, then it is from memory.

The finding of the key cannot be done from memory...... Are you saying that you must be told the key of a song before playing....or you always set the key for others to follow?

No, I was talking about finding a single note or chord. I can imagine the sound of a low or high E note or chord, and I know if I go pick up my guitar I know how to produce it, and it will match my imagination of it (if my guitar's well-tuned). Like you, I can't just "find a key" to any given song.

I have audio from a punk band I was in as a teenager, and we were trying to play a song live we'd never played before. Three of us started out in three different keys, and you can hear the bass player shout "what key is it in?" The singer, who knew even less about music than the rest of the band, but had a quick wit, said "just play it in the best key".

I see....... so the "Thought" has a sound that you can match on your strings correct?

You're driving me crazy. I don't know how to answer. The thought itself does not have a sound, it isn't accompanied by a sound. I just have a thought "about" a sound.

 

[RaymondG]

No, I was talking about finding a single note or chord. I can imagine the sound of a low or high E note or chord, and I know if I go pick up my guitar I know how to produce it, and it will match my imagination of it (if my guitar's well-tuned). Like you, I can't just "find a key" to any given song.

I have audio from a punk band I was in as a teenager, and we were trying to play a song live we'd never played before. Three of us started out in three different keys, and you can hear the bass player shout "what key is it in?" The singer, who knew even less about music than the rest of the band, but had a quick wit, said "just play it in the best key".


You're driving me crazy. I don't know how to answer. The thought itself does not have a sound, it isn't accompanied by a sound. I just have a thought "about" a sound.

Ok, then you are just like the rest of us...... What you call "imagining sound" I call hearing and speaking. The issue is, you link speaking and hearing, only to the outside mouth and ears, when I also link it to the speaking and hearing of imaginary sound.

It's ok to let us know that you imagine sounds.......we wont think you are crazy because of it. Just know that some do not go that deep into it.....we just say that we speak in our head/mind and hear what we are speaking.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I think in some of the other recent writing about this, a 'nonhearer' mentioned that when she saw movies or TV shows that had sections where there was narration of someone's inner thoughts, she wished the real world was like that. Is that how it strikes the 'nonhearers' here? That this is a fictional device?

Like there was a successful commercial from years back (and parodied in Airplane!) where a man asks for a second cup of coffee, and his wife gets a startled look, and she doesn't say anything, but you hear her thoughts, "Jim never has a second cup at home!"

As a 'hearer' this seems totally ordinary. Does it seem bizarre to the 'nonhearers'? Does it seem like a totally fictional device, rather than an analogue of a real experience (like a rapid closeup may be an analogue of a person suddenly focusing their attention on something)?

 

[JacksBratt]

I think in some of the other recent writing about this, a 'nonhearer' mentioned that when she saw movies or TV shows that had sections where there was narration of someone's inner thoughts, she wished the real world was like that. Is that how it strikes the 'nonhearers' here? That this is a fictional device?

Like there was a successful commercial from years back (and parodied in Airplane!) where a man asks for a second cup of coffee, and his wife gets a startled look, and she doesn't say anything, but you hear her thoughts, "Jim never has a second cup at home!"

As a 'hearer' this seems totally ordinary. Does it seem bizarre to the 'nonhearers'? Does it seem like a totally fictional device, rather than an analogue of a real experience (like a rapid closeup may be an analogue of a person suddenly focusing their attention on something)?

A colleague described it exactly as in your example.. the voice in movies of people thinking... as actual dialog... I hear none of that.. My colleague was fascinated that I did not... I was fascinated that they actually hear stuff.

 

[Kaon]

A colleague described it exactly as in your example.. the voice in movies of people thinking... as actual dialog... I hear none of that.. My colleague was fascinated that I did not... I was fascinated that they actually hear stuff.

I might be your colleague, because I am working trying not to have my mind blown by your mental experience(s). I honestly thought everyone heard "themselves" as @essentialsaltes described it - in one extreme or another.

I have seen you post science and math; you don't even see (for example) an electron orbiting a proton, or hear the sound of the combustion of mixing sodium with water?


And, then there is the other extreme where people cross-sense: seeing music, hearing taste, etc. It just amazing how the brain can interpret information, which is why I say no one is crazy, or everyone is crazy.

 

[Robban]

I might be your colleague, because I am working trying not to have my mind blown by your mental experience(s). I honestly thought everyone heard "themselves" as @essentialsaltes described it - in one extreme or another.

I have seen you post science and math; you don't even see (for example) an electron orbiting a proton, or hear the sound of the combustion of mixing sodium with water?


And, then there is the other extreme where people cross-sense: seeing music, hearing taste, etc. It just amazing how the brain can interpret information, which is why I say no one is crazy, or everyone is crazy.

How do you seperate your own thoughts from, Divine inspiration?

Meaning thoughts from above not from the sky somewhere but from a higher level of wisdom.

 

[Kaon]

How do you seperate your own thoughts from, Divine inspiration?

Meaning thoughts from above not from the sky somewhere but from a higher level of wisdom.

You can differentiate by awareness of your physical processes and understanding your feelings (how they lie, and how they are used by the enemy). The finesse may come from experience - something most people would never seek out themselves (and if they do, they are foolish). I am a stoic, so it helps with the compulsion to emote or respond prematurely to myself, and/or other stimuli. Mentally differentiating between the enemy, self, psychic interlopers and the Most High takes practice, prayer, fasting and faith.


It takes works just like being able to isolate particular muscle groups in order to move, say, the ring finger only, or fine-tuning the eye to be a sharp-shooter (scope only goes so far). We are taught how to be ignorant and unintelligent; a baby figures out who to trust for survival, how to walk against this plane of existence's physical forces (despite its underdeveloped mechanical system), and how to speak enough of the regional language to convey thought and information - all within a few years. Can you imagine being able to walk against the forces of Saturn, speak the native regional language, and know who/what you can trust for survival within 2 or 3 years - all with a rudimentary understanding of where you are going?

We have to be taught to be ignorant, and as we grow up we are programmed with corruption that takes us away from the Most High in the first place. If we care enough (and, if we were His from before the foundation of this plane of existence), we will find a way back to Him.

 

[Robban]

You can differentiate by awareness of your physical processes and understanding your feelings (how they lie, and how they are used by the enemy). The finesse may come from experience - something most people would never seek out themselves (and if they do, they are foolish). I am a stoic, so it helps with the compulsion to emote or respond prematurely to myself, and/or other stimuli. Mentally differentiating between the enemy, self, psychic interlopers and the Most High takes practice, prayer, fasting and faith.


It takes works just like being able to isolate particular muscle groups in order to move, say, the ring finger only, or fine-tuning the eye to be a sharp-shooter (scope only goes so far). We are taught how to be ignorant and unintelligent; a baby figures out who to trust for survival, how to walk against this plane of existence's physical forces (despite its underdeveloped mechanical system), and how to speak enough of the regional language to convey thought and information - all within a few years. Can you imagine being able to walk against the forces of Saturn, speak the native regional language, and know who/what you can trust for survival within 2 or 3 years - all with a rudimentary understanding of where you are going?

We have to be taught to be ignorant, and as we grow up we are programmed with corruption that takes us away from the Most High in the first place. If we care enough (and, if we were His from before the foundation of this plane of existence), we will find a way back to Him.

I am not sure one is aware of speaking through divine inspiration.

An example would be Rahav;

She told the spies to go up into the hills and wait three days until their pursuers returned.

Question;
How did she know their pursuers would return after three days?

Had they decided to search for five days and the spies left the hills after three, it would have been curtains for them.

Divine inspiration I think it can be said.

 

[JacksBratt]

I might be your colleague, because I am working trying not to have my mind blown by your mental experience(s). I honestly thought everyone heard "themselves" as @essentialsaltes described it - in one extreme or another.

I have seen you post science and math; you don't even see (for example) an electron orbiting a proton, or hear the sound of the combustion of mixing sodium with water?


And, then there is the other extreme where people cross-sense: seeing music, hearing taste, etc. It just amazing how the brain can interpret information, which is why I say no one is crazy, or everyone is crazy.

I know.. right?... who would have thought that people have such differences in the way they think?

 

[Kaon]

I am not sure one is aware of speaking through divine inspiration.

There are several thousands of people on this plane of existence that know Him very well, and understand when He is speaking to them. There were more in antiquity - because there wasn't a school of thought to encourage the doubt necessary to ignore Him (if it were possible).

An example would be Rahav;

She told the spies to go up into the hills and wait three days until their pursuers returned.

Question;
How did she know their pursuers would return after three days?

Had they decided to search for five days and the spies left the hills after three, it would have been curtains for them.

Divine inspiration I think it can be said.

Moses trusted what he heard when it told him what to do to part the red sea, or to face the "sorcerers" of Pharaoh, or even when he put the serpent on the stick and projected it as a healing tool.

Faith is real, and spiritual alignment is more solid than these bodies we use to navigate this plane of existence.

All of us have the ability to be an "antenna" for spirit. Over our lives, we tend to trade spiritual awareness for academic enlightenment, and we either ignore the signals, or (pretend) they don't exist. If you are an adult, it will take more work for you to recognize the Most High's voice than it would a child because "we know so much more" about reality than children. Except, the Redeemer said if we aren't like the little children, we won't inherit the Kingdom.

 

[Robban]

There are several thousands of people on this plane of existence that know Him very well, and understand when He is speaking to them. There were more in antiquity - because there wasn't a school of thought to encourage the doubt necessary to ignore Him (if it were possible).



Moses trusted what he heard when it told him what to do to part the red sea, or to face the "sorcerers" of Pharaoh, or even when he put the serpent on the stick and projected it as a healing tool.

Faith is real, and spiritual alignment is more solid than these bodies we use to navigate this plane of existence.

All of us have the ability to be an "antenna" for spirit. Over our lives, we tend to trade spiritual awareness for academic enlightenment, and we either ignore the signals, or (pretend) they don't exist. If you are an adult, it will take more work for you to recognize the Most High's voice than it would a child because "we know so much more" about reality than children. Except, the Redeemer said if we aren't like the little children, we won't inherit the Kingdom.

On the importance of teaching children the
Lubavitcher Rebbe had this to say;

"In a mature tree, a gash here or a torn branch there is of no consequence.

But the smallest scratch in the seed, the slightest nick in the sapling, results in a flaw which the decades to come will deepen rather than erase."

 

[Chesterton]

Ok, then you are just like the rest of us...... What you call "imagining sound" I call hearing and speaking. The issue is, you link speaking and hearing, only to the outside mouth and ears, when I also link it to the speaking and hearing of imaginary sound.

It's ok to let us know that you imagine sounds.......we wont think you are crazy because of it. Just know that some do not go that deep into it.....we just say that we speak in our head/mind and hear what we are speaking.

Ideally, you should call imagining sound "imagining sound", and hearing and speaking "hearing and speaking".

 

[Chesterton]

I think in some of the other recent writing about this, a 'nonhearer'...

Seriously? We're gonna start this already? Like I'm a "cis-gender" and now I'm a "nonhearer"? This is another attempt to marginalize normal people? I'll have you note the very scientific poll results which are 5.6% in my favor.

...mentioned that when she saw movies or TV shows that had sections where there was narration of someone's inner thoughts, she wished the real world was like that. Is that how it strikes the 'nonhearers' here? That this is a fictional device?

Like there was a successful commercial from years back (and parodied in Airplane!) where a man asks for a second cup of coffee, and his wife gets a startled look, and she doesn't say anything, but you hear her thoughts, "Jim never has a second cup at home!"

As a 'hearer' this seems totally ordinary. Does it seem bizarre to the 'nonhearers'? Does it seem like a totally fictional device, rather than an analogue of a real experience (like a rapid closeup may be an analogue of a person suddenly focusing their attention on something)?

It does just seem bizarre. It seems like actually hearing my thoughts every waking moment would be unbearable; it would drive me insane. But I've known people who lived near sulphur plants and oil fields. If you drive through such areas the stench in the air is really awful, but people who live nearby say it's just there all the time, so soon enough you get used to it and don't notice it.

But I keep having questions about this. If you're actually hearing something when you think, how do you think and listen to external sound at the same time? If I'm hearing two different things at once, it amounts to gibberish (except for musical instruments). If I'm in a room with one person reading from War and Peace and another person reading from The Great Gatsby at the same volume, I'm going to have to make mental effort to attend to one or the other. I cannot hear both intelligibly at once.

 

[RaymondG]

Ideally, you should call imagining sound "imagining sound", and hearing and speaking "hearing and speaking".

And herein lies the disconnect. Us young folk tend to blend these things together.

Good to know we are all sane now and it was just a misunderstanding.

We now need a spin-off thread which goes into this phenomena of imagining sound.......but this is somewhat different than the normal, closing eyes and imagining places.

 

[Kaon]

But I keep having questions about this. If you're actually hearing something when you think, how do you think and listen to external sound at the same time? If I'm hearing two different things at once, it amounts to gibberish (except for musical instruments). If I'm in a room with one person reading from War and Peace and another person reading from The Great Gatsby at the same volume, I'm going to have to make mental effort to attend to one or the other. I cannot hear both intelligibly at once.

You learn how to hear simultaneously, just like you learn to walk and chew bubble gum, or pat your head and rub your tummy (I am not being funny). You learn how to "quantize" you stimuli so that you can pay equal attention to everything while at the same time discerning where each stimuli comes from, and what each stimuli may be. Like physically controlling multiple muscle groups independently, it takes practice and a connection.

 

[Chesterton]

And herein lies the disconnect. Us young folk tend to blend these things together.

Good to know we are all sane now and it was just a misunderstanding.

I am very, very young, and I've never blended things together. In fact, language may have been invented by humans to help us avoid blending things together. I will concede however that blenders were probably invented by humans to help us blend things together.

We now need a spin-off thread which goes into this phenomena of imagining sound.......but this is somewhat different than the normal, closing eyes and imagining places.

No, imagining sound is just the same as imagining sight, smell, taste and feel.

 

[Chesterton]

You learn how to hear simultaneously, just like you learn to walk and chew bubble gum, or pat your head and rub your tummy (I am not being funny). You learn how to "quantize" you stimuli so that you can pay equal attention to everything while at the same time discerning where each stimuli comes from, and what each stimuli may be. Like physically controlling multiple muscle groups independently, it takes practice and a connection.

Walking, chewing, using muscles - these are not external stimuli. The reason we can do them is that we don't need to mentally attend to them. But if I'm listening to two or more different stimuli, I have to attend to one at a time to meaningfully process them. If you don't, fine. I'm just saying what I have to do.

 

[HARK!]

Good question......because I still think its possible that we all hear....and some just dont view thoughts as a voice speaking???? maybe a semantics issue?

Then again, I am able to reproduce almost anything I hear on the keyboard....and there are many who cant understand how it is done........even those who can sight read music sheets. Im wondering if their lack of ability to sing or hum sounds in their head can cause this confusion.

On another note.... I know a lot of bi-lingual people and, one day, I became curious as to which language they thought in. Most stated that it was their mother tongue...... not one stated that they do not hear any voice in there head.

I've worked as a sound engineer. In my studies, I found out that you attenuate a sound reinforcement system for speech, differently than one for music. The reason is that different parts of the brain process speech and music.

I have outstanding musical ability. I can walk onto stage and play a song with a band, live, by ear, having never heard the song before.

Why does this matter? Because for all of my life there has been music playing in my head. It mostly started with the Beatles. I can pick out each voice's harmony. I can pick out every note of each instrument, at will.

Why does this matter? Because despite this unusual ability, I couldn't tell you what any of the Beatles songs were saying, except for the chorus. I don't hear lyrics. The voice sounds like just another instrument. I have to struggle, and play each section of the song back again, and again, to hear what is said.

When I learned about the two different parts of the brain processing sound,; it dawned on me why I couldn't do what seemed so easy to everyone else around me. The musical part of my brain totally masks the speech part.

Years later a read of a scientific study of why men don't hear women. The study did brain scans to see what parts of men's brain were active when women spoke, Guess what. In the cases where men didn't hear women, it was music to their ears.

Strangely, women have commented to me several times; that I was actually listening to them; that most men don't listen to them. They brought this up after I brought up past conversations with them. The musical part of my brain must hear women just fine.

 

[Gene2memE]

A colleague of mine was amazed at something she just found out. I had never heard of it either.
What she read was that some people, when they are thinking, hear their own voice, audibly just like they are actually talking. They can look in the mirror and have an internal conversation with themselves... while hearing their voice.

This colleague, and others so we have found, do just that. They were baffled that myself and others could think and make decisions in the silence of our mind.

So, are you one who can think and have thoughts in silence... Or... do you hear your own voice in a audible dialog?

From what I recall, the stats on the percentage of people with an internal voice/narrative vary really wildly depending on time and place. Some studies have it at above 80% and others have it at just 20%.

Inner speech is just one of five (or six) inner mechanism relating to thought.

It's also interesting that of those that do have an internal voice, some people hear it constantly and other people only hear it intermittently.

I'm lucky and/or cursed (depending on perspective) in that I have not just an internal monologue, but a full on multi-party conversation going on inside my head. My brain can be having an argument with itself quite easily, while another voice is doing something completely different, like reciting a verse, singing a song or bothering me with some esoteric and useless piece of knowledge.

When I started second year psychology at university, I was surprised to find out was this unusual (it happens to something like 3% of the general population) and that most people in my lecture theater only had a monologue.

My tutor, on the other hand, was delighted, and spent most of the rest of the semester trying to devise tests for me to participate in.

 

[Kaon]

Walking, chewing, using muscles - these are not external stimuli. The reason we can do them is that we don't need to mentally attend to them. But if I'm listening to two or more different stimuli, I have to attend to one at a time to meaningfully process them. If you don't, fine. I'm just saying what I have to do.

Ok.