our internal monolog - "I", "we", and "you"

Foxx

The Living Force
To start, I'm sorry if this topic is a dupe--it's broad enough that I searched around a bit but wasn't sure how I would locate a similar topic with such common keywords without digging through the whole forum manually. As well, I'm not sure if it makes more sense to be in The Work, or the "What's on your Mind" section, so I've posted in the latter to reduce potential noise. I imagine whether it belongs in The Work section will depend on what discussion, if any, forms as a result.

Earlier this summer while with a group of people I know, someone who was fairly new asked "does anybody else say 'we' when referring to themselves in their mind?"--no one else did, but I did, and was slightly surprised both to be the only one, and also encounter another one who did so. In fact, I've generally said "we" for the majority of my thoughts starting somewhere between one and two decades ago. The memory I have from when I began (being old it's possibly false, but feels accurate) is sitting on the toilet in the bathroom long ago and thinking something like "well, it's clear that there's more than one of us in here, so we might as well go by 'we'".

While I observed myself doing this for years, I never shared it with anyone (obvious stigmas of 'being crazy'--people generally think I'm crazy enough as it is, despite their chronic lack of research and introspection) and obviously always translated my thoughts into "I" form when speaking to others. The phenomenon goes a little deeper, though, especially having come to the beginnings of my esoteric studies. I don't exclusively refer to myself as "we" all the time, but sometimes I dialog within myself, sometimes being "I" (usually referring to my physical being and moving center), usually being "we", and sometimes hearing "you" to refer to "me", typically when I'm asking questions. As well, sometimes I can tell the different "I"s apart by how they sound (both in "voice" quality, how they use words, and what they talk about), and sometimes, perhaps, they may even go by "we", but "we" seems fairly consistent, though possibly with two primary roles as a more unified I and as a possible "higher self"/higher intellectual center.

There are times too, when I ask myself questions and, if I "keep myself quiet enough" (non-anticipate), get answers with potentially interesting meanings. I've been well aware that one's thoughts and emotions, manifesting as internal monolog, can be deceptive and, like all information, needs to be verified, for quite some time. But, at times, I've seen some predictions turn out true, gotten health advice (confirmed with research later), and had other potentially interesting things/commentary happen. I don't automatically believe the "answers" to any of "my" questions, nor have I for quite some time.

While I had no theoretical construct for what all this might mean before coming to The Work and the Cassiopaean materials, with such information potentially interesting results emerge.

One other thing, in a similar vein, is that when I was in either middle school or high school (based on physically where I remember this thought occurring) I was thinking about mind-reading without any obvious context (perhaps unconscious awareness) and I wondered to myself if I could "encrypt"--specifically the word I used--my thoughts. I think I imagined something like a brick wall going up around me/my mind. I have serious doubts that it worked, though I've read mentions of mental blocking in the Cs material with Laura and perhaps this concept is similar, but am curious if anyone else has had similar experiences/thoughts/etc?

I'm interested in any reflections others have regarding this, whether others have had any similar experiences or also refer to themselves in their internal monolog as "we", or what the internal monologs of other people are like in general. I'm not aware of much of a survey/general information on what people's internal monologs are like, in general.

Thanks!
 
Hi Foxx,

Your topic surprised me, to be honest - and I had to dig deep to come up with an answer of sorts.

When inner talking occurs within me, it depends on the subject at hand how I would address myself. For instance, when physiological processes are the topic I would address myself as 'it', preferably. When programmes and false personality have prevalence I tend to address myself as 'one'. Some other cases may call for 'we' as in pluralis auctoris or pluralis modestiae, thus making myself anonymous again to a great extent. Very seldom I use 'we' as in pluralis majestatis or in the meaning of an all inclusive 'me, myself and I, PLUS that other guy' (i.e. trying to include the real me (Higher Self) into the ensemble of Id, Ego and conventional Super-ego, so to speak).

But in most cases I just use 'I' and/or 'You' when talking to myself directly or about myself to myself indirectly. OSIT.

So, my immediate question would be: about which sort of 'we' are we talking, when you talk about WE to yourself? Modestiae/auctoris or majestatis? Or something else altogether, like the ensemble of known little i's? Very curious to hear what others might think about this or do themselves, too.

On another note, there seems to be a thread around a similar topic that could be relevant here, titled: Self-Observation, Inner Talking & Work Instrument, which can be found here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,22.0.html Please, have a look down there to decide whether you could use that information to get any wiser about this.

Just some thoughts. FWIW.
 
i often adress myself as "we" in my thoughts. in my case the "we" usually means both aspects of me - the mind and the body.
"you" is also used, especially when scolding myself for doing something less than smart.
to top it off, thinking of myself as "I" is also a common ocurrance. ;)
 
Iconoclast said:
[...]
"you" is also used, especially when scolding myself for doing something less than smart.
[...]

Many times I use a more "colorful" language than the word "you"... :P
 
Palinurus said:
Hi Foxx,

Your topic surprised me, to be honest - and I had to dig deep to come up with an answer of sorts.

When inner talking occurs within me, it depends on the subject at hand how I would address myself. For instance, when physiological processes are the topic I would address myself as 'it', preferably. When programmes and false personality have prevalence I tend to address myself as 'one'. Some other cases may call for 'we' as in pluralis auctoris or pluralis modestiae, thus making myself anonymous again to a great extent. Very seldom I use 'we' as in pluralis majestatis or in the meaning of an all inclusive 'me, myself and I, PLUS that other guy' (i.e. trying to include the real me (Higher Self) into the ensemble of Id, Ego and conventional Super-ego, so to speak).

But in most cases I just use 'I' and/or 'You' when talking to myself directly or about myself to myself indirectly. OSIT.

So, my immediate question would be: about which sort of 'we' are we talking, when you talk about WE to yourself? Modestiae/auctoris or majestatis? Or something else altogether, like the ensemble of known little i's? Very curious to hear what others might think about this or do themselves, too.

On another note, there seems to be a thread around a similar topic that could be relevant here, titled: Self-Observation, Inner Talking & Work Instrument, which can be found here: http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,22.0.html Please, have a look down there to decide whether you could use that information to get any wiser about this.

Just some thoughts. FWIW.

Hi Palinurus! Thanks so much for the response and sorry for my delayed response (busy times recently, as you can imagine)!

I haven't made it all the way through the link you posted yet, but it's certainly been very informative so far, as was your response.

I've been observing how I use "we" in my mind to determine how I use it exactly and what was made clear to me with your comment and the linked subject was that regardless of how I use it, I'm certainly identifying with it and grasping what, exactly, I'm referring to while using it becomes more challenging in observation. For the most part, it feels like a collection of 'I's, but clearly I still have a great deal of reading and work to do and, even if it is an ensemble, I'm identifying with it. The anonymity reflection is interesting to consider--I have more thinking to do in that area. I'm not sure I follow your thinking on the use of the various pluralis definitions in this context (was only vaguely familiar with majestatis until looking into the others)--as in, who all the 'actors' are, so I'm not sure I currently have an adequate response to them.

Iconoclast said:
i often adress myself as "we" in my thoughts. in my case the "we" usually means both aspects of me - the mind and the body.
"you" is also used, especially when scolding myself for doing something less than smart.
to top it off, thinking of myself as "I" is also a common ocurrance. ;)

This sounds pretty similar to what I hear in my internal mono/dialog. Perhaps "You" comes up for me when a different 'I' has taken hold and is justifying doing something "against the rules" (ie, staying up too late, "forgetting" to take some form of medicine, etc).

Al Today said:
Iconoclast said:
[...]
"you" is also used, especially when scolding myself for doing something less than smart.
[...]

Many times I use a more "colorful" language than the word "you"... :P

:) I've done that before! I try and remain nice about it, these days, and have been weaning myself off of my usages of "colorful" language.

Thanks for all your input, everyone!
 
Back
Top Bottom