Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Oh, you mean the voice that sounds a lot like the voice of your mother
    ;-). 
    
    I have found that my second voice is usually, not my conscience, but
    leftovers from my very early training. It tells you the things you
    learned first in life, before you started changing your mind and
    relearning things.
    
    I have learned that lots of things I thought were true aren't true
    for me. A lot of what my parents taught me is not relevant to my
    life.
    
    Sometimes my voice is my better judgment. Usually it wins in those
    cases because it makes sense. But sometimes it's just too moralistic to
    be taken seriously. I hate it when It sounds like this. 
    
    "You better not do that. You'll get in trouble."
    
    "Shut up. I know what I'm doing."
    
    "You're wrong. You're making a terrible mistake."
    
    "I have learned I can do this."
    
    "You'll be sorry."
                                                           
    Tamzen

	Freud would divide the "little voice" into three separate entities:

	(1) The Id.		- Instinctual desires and needs (Internal).

	(2) The Ego.		- Societal rules and mores (External).

	(3) The SuperEgo.	- The mediator who compromises issues for the
				above two voices.


	Love would ultimately fall under the control of the SuperEgo, but the
    desires which foster love would originate from the Id and the rules by
    which love is administered come from the Ego.

								-davo

    I can really only think of a few instances in which my little
    voice warned me of anything. In those cases, it was most likely
    right, but I ignored it. Ignoring it didn't make my life easier,
    but then if life was easy it wouldn't be as much fun.
    
    An example? Oh, how about my falling in love with a woman who
    lives in Minneapolis?
    
    --- jerry

    And Brizinski would call it Judeo-Christian Guilt.

    I usually blow it off.

    
    I am pretty intuitive so I *usually* listen to my inner self..
    sometimes I don't and those are usually the times I really screw
    up!!  
    
    I am probably the happiest I have been in a long time and I know
    it is due to the fact I am following my own conscience and doing
    what *I* think is best for myself... I am trying very hard not to
    let the opinions of others influence my way of thinking and it
    really is keeping my head on straight!
    
    later, gailann
    
    

You people must have really boring inner lives 8-). I can't imagine what it
would be like to have only 3 inner voices. I have DOZENS. I can find the
internal simularcrum of just about every real-life person who has ever had
an influence on me. My parents, siblings and past lovers have major speaking
roles in most of the internal drama, but even Mrs. Deneen, my kindergarten
teacher, gets to walk on once in a while and shake her finger or smile at
me.

Whichever internal character is clamoring for attention usually has
something interesting to say which is worth listening to, but that doesn't
mean I have to take all the advice I get.

Interestingly, I can never win any agruments with the internal voices. If
internal Mom says, "you better not do that, you'll get in trouble" she's
even HARDER to convince that it's OK to take a risk than my real Mom would
ever be. But if I can enlist the internal Dad as an ally, then I'm all set.
He tells her, "come on, he's a big boy now, he knows how to be careful" and
I'm home free.

When thinking about a relationship there are 3 main voices that need to be
consulted. 1: the voice of the body. (Would this be fun?) 2: the voice of
the conscience (Goddess, superego, whatever you call it) would this be
right? and 3: the voice of Mr. Spock (what are the chances that this would
work?" ("Approximately 136,532.75 to one against, Captain." "Thank you,
Spock. Helm, full speed ahead."))

Don.

re: .7,

	I agree that the voices are not usually limited to merely three,
    just the consensus of opinion.  I typically have entire congressional
    hearings played-out within my little pea-brain.  Sometimes things get
    real radical an entire governments are overthrown and fascists take over,
    or even (shudder to think!) Communists!  When this happens, sometimes
    certain voices are taken out and maimed and tortured until they give-in
    and when they still persist - they occassionally get assasinated!.

	Most of my internal political turmoils were resolved years ago,
    and I now have a very well-mannered governing body within my inner
    sanctum, but since it is a democracy, there are still occasionally some
    controversial issues that come up for a vote which stir disscussions.

	Incidentally, I think your analogy of Spock would probably apply to
    the SuperEgo (being the logical arbitrator between the Ego and the Id),
    whereas the Parent's voice you hear would probably be the Ego trying to
    manipulate the Id inside of you.

							-davo

    I thought that, according to Freud, the Ego was the arbitrator between
    the super-ego (conscience) and the ID (desires).  

    
    re: all sorts
    
    I find it interesting that people are associating these 'inner
    monitors' with some other figure in their lives, i.e., Mom.  I also
    find it interesting that people have an assortment of them.
    
    Me, I've got just the one, and it's definitely not either of my
    parents.  I think they'd be disillusioned to hear some of the things
    my little voice has to say.  They probably thought they raised the
    kid to be more hopeful than that.
    
    If I had to associate my little voice with an image, the image would
    be someone in a Darth Vader costume.  Relentlessly rational and
    impervious.
    
    I didn't think Freud had anything to say about this sort of thing,
    but then again, my inclinations towards analysis in general have
    sort of kept me from reading too much of this stuff.  Note and learn,
    I s'poze.
    
    Dave W.

re: -2,

	You were right!  I've got the Superego and the Ego mixed up!
    No wonder I'm so rigidly regulated by society. ;^)  The correct version
    of Freud's theory would then be:

	(1) Id - Instinctual desires etc....

	(2) Superego - Parental conscience and rules of society etc...

	(3) Ego - Mediator between above two


	I would imagine that I had Freud rolling in his grave their for
    a few hours.  Sorry about that old chap! 8-0

								-davo

    Transaction Analysis talks about voices that represent various aspects
    of ones personality.  They are:
    	Child - like a freudian id, I think
    	Parent - Like a freudian superego, similarly
    	Adult - Like an Ego
    Anyway, TA describes tapes (audio) which contain messages from the
    parent and play whenever one needs a decision.  I am a more visual
    than auditory person, and have tapes (video) that have a similar
    function.  Whether one hears voices or sees pictures or has hunches
    is probably a function of how we represent things in our minds.
    In any case, I can't imagine how a person could function without
    access to this history on ourselves.
    

    Interesting topic.  So far we have had:
    
    	Relating to perfect strangers
    	Relating to one's SO
    	Relating to one's ex-SO
    	Relating to one's children
    	Relating to one's boss
    	Relating to one's Parents
    
    Now we have
    
    	Relating to one's self.
    
    This is starting to look like the PSYCHOLOGY.NOT I didn't find when
    I first started looking for notes to read a couple years ago.
    
    Re .3  Ego<->SuperEgo
    
    I just assumed that davo just had a unique set up in his head that Freud
    would have liked to take a look at.  Might have explained his behavior
    in notes too.  Hmmm.  Sure you didn't have it right the first time
    davo?  If the forces fighting in your head obtain nuclear capability
    please be sure inform me so I can leave MRO1 in time. :-) :-)
      
    My little voice tends to be my ID.  My superego usually talks my
    ego out of any ideas the ID may have.  I have a very strong superego.
    I wish my superego would shut up and let me have some fun once
    in a while.
    
    The other voice I have is the voice of experience.  This voice
    thinks up all the possible ways things could go wrong and makes
    sure that I do something about each and every possibility.  Most
    of the time nothing goes wrong and I end up having wasted the
    time I used preparing for them.
    
    I find one thing interesting.  I find I am most critical of other
    people for things my little voices would never let me get away with.
    Anyone else see this happening?
    
    						MJC
    

re: .13,

	...and what little things might those be, pray tell?

	I must admit that I got a little carried away with my voices
    analogy a few replies back, I hope nobody took any of that stuff
    seriously or I could wind-up in the looney bin!

	Anyway, I have decided to label any further flipancy of this
    sort which originates from the Id section of my personality (and
    likewise any rational and perfected thought from my Ego and Superego)
    by using the following signatures:

	(1) -david	- My ID.

	(2) -davo	- My Ego.

	(3) -superdavo	- My Superego.

	I would hope that all of my replies would be moderated by my Ego
    (and as such, signed -davo), but in case there happens to be a sudden
    power struggle, then at least everyone knows which voice is to be held
    accountable.  I also hope that I don't need to step in to moderate such
    fantastic outbursts by the ID faction as have been the case at times.
    My apologies for not having seen this happening sooner,

						-superdavo

    Superdavo
    
    	One of the powerful things that may result from naming aspects
    of yourself is one part of you can address another.  In fact, lonely
    can become an archaic notion if you develop this.  On the other
    hand, our society views extremes in this direction as justification
    to severely restrict your freedom, so be careful.
    
    Robert

re: 15, etc.,

	Whatzamatta, can't anyone take a joke these days?  Oh, I guess I
    forgot to put smiley faces all over my replies... :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 
     :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 
     :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 
     :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 
     :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 
     :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 
     :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-) 

	There.  That should do it.

							-davo


    p.s.  Smiley faces protect you from the looney-bin.

    
    that many smiley faces could give ya heartburn!
    
    :-), gailann
    

re: :-),

	Well, you know...I had to enter one smiley face for every facet of
    my personality - I wouldn't want to leave anyone out! :-)

							-davo

I have a similacrum of all the people I have ever meet too... 

I listen to them for decisions, but I use them for other things too.  This way I
can talk to the people I have loved any time that I need to.  I use them to
roleplay difficult situations with to pre/post-pare myself for/from the
difficult situations. 

I do have to be carefull.  It would be easy to lose reality if I did this too
much. Too much talking to those who are no longer with me, is escaping into the
past.  Too much talking to people who are in the present, deprives the real
person of the conversation, and gradually will lead my vision of that person off
into unreality... 

They are nice to have when there is noone else though, and I guess that is why
I'm never bored by myself, when I'm waiting for ...

Jim (Karl, Kitty, Karen, ...)

    That reminds me of something I read of how the "primitive" tribes,
    and particularly the American Indians, see spirits in their everyday
    lives.  The Indians, as I understand, do not see people leaving
    them upon death, rather, they assume a kind of "ghost" identity
    and live on with the tribe.  Almost like the voices in the previous
    reply.  The feeling I get, when I try to imagine that type of world
    view, is kind of like floating, with no definite line between material
    reality and non-material reality (existentialist-like).  Being able
    to gaze out my window at the plains (I'm in Colorado), I can evision
    being out there say 200 years ago, with nothing around and yet feeling
    akin to everything, all animal spirits, bird spirits, and ancestor
    sprits...
    
    So maybe the more voices the merrier!

    Re 64.21 Plains Indian Spirits
    
    If the images/voices in my mind are a mixture of (1) various aspects
    of an integrated entity (me) and (2) external spirits, I am gonna
    have a lot of trouble discerning the boundary between me and not-me.
    Just thinking about that give me goose-bumps.  Are those Indians
    the same people that smoke cactus buds and eat loco plants?  How
    could a human making that assumption relate to a human who only
    experienced images/voices that came from their own personal history?

    "The origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind"
    by Julian Jaynes is full of speculation about this kind of thing.
    I think it's bogus, but you people who hear voices might think it
    interesting.
    
    As a synopsis, he proposes that ancient peoples (and modern
    pre-literates) really did see gods and hear voices, and that they
    are not self-aware the way most modern literate peoples are.
    He ties this in with the existence of idols and pantheons, ghosts
    and statues.
    
    				-John Bishop

    Re: .13, last paragraph
    
    Yes. 
    
    --
    
    			Seth