Silent Voice of Reason: Understanding the Inner Dialogue

There is this voice in our thoughts and minds. Whose sound is so low that its noise isn’t heard a breath away. Our thoughts have this voice—it is the most moral voice we would love to always hear. We psyche ourselves up and are motivated, so we march to do something that we follow to completion. This voice inspires us, but our willpower is depleted once we have tasked ourselves with the 18 of the job.

The stages that this voice goes through include:

1. Speaking

2. Drawing neural connections

3. Judgement

4. Forgetting

Speaking

The voice has channeled itself to speak about anything. Anything it can imagine, it speaks. It doesn’t care whether it harms or if the speech is crooked; it just opens its breath and utters. He shouldn’t be blamed because whatever it can imagine is a fault of what it has been fed and with that processing, it churns out what comes in.

Heavily influenced by the past experiences and information it is provided with, it ensures that what it says doesn’t appear mortally deficient, but it sways in an area that is culturally confined.

For example, it speaks of a same-sex arrangement or marriage. This is taboo in most reserved cultures, and this speech isn’t morally sufficient to live adequately in a family. However, in the Western world, it has been ingrained in such a manner that growing children have to acknowledge that July is Pride Month.

The voice of reason, therefore, has certain limitations in its speaking in that what it says has been rounded off to the nearest experience, information, family (culture) nurtured in, and most importantly, environment grown up in. If the above support behavior is morally polite, then the information is interpreted as good behavior, and saying anything centered around it will make life easier to go with. However, in an environment where thoughts have not been thought or certain information hasn't been passed, certain speech will not be entertained.

Just the same way, praising Satan in an environment where he is condemned will get people staring at you in wonderment and disbelief. Some will be irritated that what we all thought to be true is not what we all think and say. Once a certain speech is uttered, the second step is initiated.

Drawing neural connections

This is the important step in the algorithm towards the voice of reason. In the above, I kept saying the information is in past experiences, environment, and culture, but all this relies on the neural connections database. This is a huge cloud of storage that is accessed each time the voice articulates any words.

The voice sometimes speaks in the lowest whispers because it’s uncertain of the environment, the experience at the moment, or a different culture about which it is uncertain. It tries to get through any connections, but it finds an endless road with nothing to carry, and thus its voice diminishes.

Neural connections have wires connecting time, location, activity, judgment, and feeling, and storing them on shelves may make them accessible when needed, though we tend to forget them earlier on if they are not accessed periodically.

It so happens that after the voice speaks, it plunges into the database of neural connections. It thinks the speaker is speaking.

Following the example in the above section, when the voice speaks of same-sex marriage, it goes to the database and accesses any information stored in it. The information is presented in a pile of disorganized patterns and thrown heavily, like a pile of dirt on a spade. The information descends like an angel from the heavens and straight to earth. The connections start to filter the information and package it according to the context of either experience, time, location, person, or judgment made the previous time.

After the filtering process, the connection compares the information that occurred recently to the one from the past. It’s in this time package that the data starts to gain relevance to the situation in question. The connections work to draw relevant information before the next step is initialized.

To make it easier, let’s proceed with the same example. The information may be that in our culture we don’t accept same-sex marriage. It will be morally degrading to invite Lucifer to your premises. The people around us will segregate us and not want to be associated with us. And as an experience, we see the neighbor’s child who decided to come out as a same-sex arrangement participate, the beating they received, and recently, schools locked them out. The parliament approved bills to punish anyone who did such. The information is released during a momentous loading.

The reverse will be true for those who grew up in an environment with no accusations against same-sex arrangements.

That is why it’s always easy to say yes a second time after being convinced the first time and drawing all the necessary conclusions to say yes to that which is beneficial and not morally degrading or opposing.

Judgement

It’s here where the processed data from the raw pile of information is analyzed for viruses in terms of moral acceptance, humane approaches, cultural collaboration, and environmental enlightenment.

Is what I just said able to pass as good whenever and wherever I get to speak it? This is the judgment that the voice goes on to undertake. It questions the information it’s given and gets to decide whether to proceed further. In the same way that justice is passed in a jury court after evaluating written rules either in the constitution or looking at past judgments in cases where the mistakes were ruled in court and the kind of redemption or punishment was administered if found guilty or the measures taken to atone for the sins of the guilty.

Judgment may say that here I may be a bit friendly, as my past interaction with the guy seemed fruitful, and I don’t have to be fearful of him, but the tone should be more businesslike so that the guy knows that I am serious. I may have read that the guy adores these types of shoes, and I may like to present myself in them, but I remember he is partly jealous, and I may lose an opportunity by appearing far off from him, thus opting for another shoe that is less auspicious and not accounted for by the guy.

Judgment might also suggest that in my environment, using a mother-tongue language will make me able to communicate a particular concept better than in the bookish language of complex lingua franca. Otherwise, using simple language with complex language will guarantee more success. It may suggest that certain topics are better discussed when certain people are present and others should be discussed at certain times when there is minimal noise and in an uplifting way. In the same way, judgment is passed that you cannot preach to the deaf using our speech language for conversion and that we could employ sign language to assist. Otherwise, forget about preaching for conversion rather than preaching for miracles to happen so that the deaf may hear.

Judgment may suggest that the topic of same-sex marriage is difficult and complex for the elderly in the rural areas where we grew up. But rather, this will be a topic of disputes and bloodshed if it is a debate motion in our universities. Either from information gotten on the internet or from past experiences.

Forgetting

This is a later step that is confirmed by how long the judgment may take and if we are to speak about the subject again. It’s a cycle in which we will repeat ourselves every time we try racing against the voice and trying to intimidate it.

The voice forgets what is said, the neural networks it formed, and the judgment it formed, thus becoming irrational once more. More like an idiot. And I can say from most individuals that we are predictably irrational, as the title of Dan Ariely’s book (which you should read) suggests. I don’t know if it’s forgetting or if we tend to not hear the voice of reason.

I too am a victim in the sense that I am easily swayed away when making decisions. This is despite knowing from experience that so and so is manipulative to me or that I lack assertiveness when it comes to a certain person. Sometimes I get comfortable and lazy about any task I have to accomplish. Procrastination has taken a toll on many of my projects and how they would perform if I were committed to the cause of it all.

The voice too gets tired as it learns of this habit, and the experiences fade away or the context isn’t placed accurately by the neural networks, which work hand in hand. Forgetfulness is also influenced by our constant need to fit in socially. Though not morally degrading, it works in reverse to our growth, where we depend on communal thinking to determine if our thinking is acceptable, with a big gray area that is not known to us.

Although the voice of reason is usually smooth and too difficult to hear, there is some restraint that, if placed on the body, will eliminate sources of noise. In the same way that to create space in a bucket full of water, we should empty the water in the bucket.

The voice is calm so that we are not frightened when we converse with it, and any judgment we pass through should make us scared to stand by it and be assertive. No-Saying is the art of listening to the voice of reason.