Perhaps I can clarify some things about how the mind works. We actually have multiple parallel thought processes all the time. We only know of the main focus at the top of consciousness, but there are others running. For example, we always have a 'survival-related' loop of thought running that examines our environment for threats, looking for the tigers. If we get too distracted from it by looking for daisies, this could harm us.
A problem with the average person is that they are, or get, lazy and turn everything over to the automatic processes and they coast along like NPCs. Only when something is sufficiently strong to drive deviation of focus to what's important do they do what's needed. For instance the tiger bites them and they wake up. In our socioeconomic/political situations, it takes starvation or physical peril for the NPC to wake up.
I felt this once in my life. I was the most hung over I had ever been and sitting at work and realized I hadn’t had a thought in my head all morning / afternoon until this one. It was literally like just blank no thought entered or left. I was just there. Who knows what else I did the night before ... I was young but obviously did something to my brain. Short lived thank God. I then remember thinking “oh this is what really dumb people must feel like all the time.” It was an interesting feeling for sure.
I also think if you were raised with a religious background that taught you to pray in your mind to God a lot that it helped to develop that inner dialogue
Interesting thought. The ancients developed lots of good things that they didn't understand but were important. So, they became parts of religion/culture.
I'm 90% convinced that a strong inner monologue tendency develops when a person desires or needs to discuss things with others but can't find anyone willing or able to discuss xyz things, for example say a person grows up in a family or social environment where there is a huge elephant in the room so to speak, they notice it glaringly but everyone around them either acts like it's not real or has a cold silent attitude about it ie acting like it's very taboo to acknowledge it, that person is then much more likely to develop a strong inner monologue to meet the need of socially processing things that everyone else seems to either dissociate from or willfully ignore, so it makes a LOT of sense that many people branded as "conspiracy theorists" would have a strong inner monologue, ie people who hone in on things that most people don't want to acknowledge let alone discuss
You realize the premise of the article is there are different modes of thinking and that inner monologue or internal dialogue is just 1 of them. That is the point of the article. This is not new either. It is basic psychology.
The key part is that a stream of thought that is similar to reading or hearing a sentence is not the only method.
I would argue the bigger problem is the pushing that feelings/emotions is a method of thinking and it is not. It is a method of Sensory or maybe perception. The real problem of this is that we must temper our feelings and can use them to understand experiences but should not use them to make decisions.
Someone lacking an inner dialogue questioning all stimuli are more prone to acting upon emotions, peer pressure, and instinct.
If CNN scares you about the virus, and you don't have an internal skeptical voice in your head questioning what you are being told and trying to corroborate facts and data, then you are going to act upon the emotional fear perpetrated by CNN jew news propaganda.
If a black criminal attacks police and gets shot, and you are a dumb instinctive negro who will riot and loot because you cannot mentally have a dialogue and consider all facts and that the negro had just sexually assaulted a woman in front of children (Jacob Blake), then you are going to respond and act like an ape.
The internal monologue is important. It's a reasoning mechanism. A check and balance against being a mindless NPC.
SO the article is not suggesting that internal questioning is not happening. It is suggesting the questioning is not always in the form of a narrative such as a string of words. Some times it is in the form of pictures/images, conceptual understandings or (IMHO wrongly) emotions.
The article is not suggesting some people are "mindless".
For what it is worth I think some people have turned over critical thought to out side agencies for ________. "Fill in the blank reasons."
I do not believe anyone is born without the ability to have internal conscious thought and analysis short of some form of disability. I do entertain the possibility that the processes that in place now are designed to cause people to give up or distrust their own internal analytical processes. I also admit and think it is probable that the PTB are trying to create/breed/change people to have little to no internal analytical processes. In other words the effort of the PTB is to turn people in to barely thinking Animals.
The author mentioned in the article, Russell Hurlburt, seems to suggest that no one has an internal dialogue going on 100% of their time. They reference the mindlessness of pouring ourselves a cup of coffee. Maybe we aren't thinking while we are doing it.
He seems to suggest that no one is 100% mindless or mindful all the time. Only to degrees. Also, some people are more mindful than others.
The masking and fake vaccine compliance proved to me that most people are as mindful as a cow moo'ing while it chews on grass.
a) sameness represents the impressing origin of what can one think about, while all those with the ability to think represent the differences within.
b) different minds are being subjected by the same input (perceivable inspiration), yet tempted to ignore this for subjecting themselves to other differences (suggested information).
To make this worse...others suggest differences under the brand of "sameness". The many "want" to come together, while ignoring the "need" to sustain apartheid (living) within sameness (process of dying). This mass ignorance allows the few to stay apart within the many who pretend to be the same, when coming together.
Wow what a great article I'm half way through it and it's fascinating. I believe my son suffers from this condition of no internal dialogue. Of course he has issues because he is 17 but I think he inherited some of his mom's bad mental traits. Fortunately he wants to join the Marines next year and that should help him have a purpose and guidance. Thankfully he is very patriotic and built like a tank.
Your son joining the marines may be a very bad idea.
He is going to serve the marines. But who do the marines serve?
The brainwashed nationalist in you who was brainwashed reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag and national anthem devotion might say it is to serve "the people."
I caution you to be more realist, and honest, and realize that our military, including the marines, are merely mercenaries for bad people.
Your son becoming a lowly paid mercenary for a corrupt government is not something I would encourage.
a) expression (living) within impressing (process of dying) aka growth within loss, can choose to repress oneself by burdening (depression) oneself with information suggested by others, hence consenting to fill up conscious memory with suggested information, instead of utilizing it for adaptation to perceivable inspiration.
b) "understanding" represents ones choice to want to stand under what another one suggests one to consent to. The more one stands under, the more depressed one feels by the burden one consented to stand under.
I wonder if they are connected?
a) all represents one in energy, hence interconnection.
b) nature sets itself apart, from whole (loss) into partial (growth) aka being apart (living) within togetherness (process of dying), hence representing INTER (internal aka being within) CONNECT (fasten together) -TION (through action).
c) to wonder represents EMO'TION, noun [Latin emotio; emoveo, to move from.], which tempts one to ignore being (life) moved by (inception towards death), hence being within motion, while in need to resist the temptation to be moved from ones position.
This is why suggested temptation lures Alice into the Wonderland...
a) look around you...how could one, surrounded by everything, be lonely? Could the suggestions of others to unite, and the division shaped by trying to unite, tempt one into self imposed isolation, just to get away from all the conflict?
b) LONE, adjective - "solitary; single; standing by itself"...doesn't that represent every single "one" in existence? If existence represents a shared experience, then how could one discern self, perceive as self; comprehend for self...without being "one" self?
c) what if "alone" is being suggested to tempt justification for self imposed isolation (leave me alone), while containing a sleight of hand for those who resist suggested (fiction) for perceivable (reality)?
What if "alone" implies ALL (in) ONE aka all single (living) within one whole (process of dying)? What if all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power", hence internal/inherent power representing whole/partial aka loss/growth aka action/reaction aka flow/form aka balance/choice aka living/process of dying?
d) SURVI'VE, verb [Latin supervivo.] - "to outlive"...can the living outlive the process of dying? What if the few suggest survivalism to tempt the many to place fear and hope towards suggested outcomes, while ignoring to resist perceivable origin for the prolonged sustenance of self?
effects of depression among women
From the perspective of female...impression (process of dying) for expression (growth) adds the intercourse with the male, hence compressing offspring within the uterus/womb. All the infertile; promiscuous behavior tempts compression without sustenance from within, hence depressing the female.
Psychology professor Russell Hurlburt (left) has been studying what he calls inner experience for more than 40 years. He's written six books on the topic
The 5 main ways of thinking:
Inner speaking/ inner monologue - Ex. talking to yourself, hearing your voice or someone else or audibly recalling a phone number.
Inner seeing/ visual imagery - Thoughts with a visual symbol. Ex. picturing a memory or a place you wish you lived.
Feelings - A conscious experience of emotional process. Ex. feeling sad after the death of a loved one.
Unsymbolized thinking - No word or image associated with thoughts. Ex. pouring your morning coffee without telling yourself to.
Sensory awareness- Paying attention to a sensory aspect of the environment for an unimportant reason. Ex. hearing someone talk but seeing the light reflecting off their glasses.
According to Hulburt, not many people have an inner monologue 100 per cent of the time, but most do sometimes. He estimates that inner monologue is a frequent thing for 30 to 50 per cent of people.
"There are very big individual differences," he said, "Some people have absolutely none and some people have pretty close to 100 per cent."
Over the last few years, I've been studying this phenomena and found that it's one entryway connecting to dozens of other subjects and leading into the story of the whole of human experience back to, well, the beginning of humans.
Now that sounds quite audacious, does it not? How could some rando on the Internet have stumbled into such knowledge? It used to surprise me too, enough to make me think I must be mistaken. But no, it no longer surprises me and I can point out why, right here in this post.
Take a look up and down the quite lengthy replies on this post: some interesting anecdotes, and lots of the usual nonsense of course, but the ones that attempted to engage with it on an "intellectual" basis just speculated and made naked assertions. It's what my old calculus teacher used to refer to as "fiat" and "hand-waving".
That is, almost no one attempted to actually investigate this idea, to explore it, most importantly to associate it with other phenomena. There were two exceptions:
Zap mentioned hylics. That's correct. People have recognized this phenomena for millennia, and collecting the knowledge others have gained is one of the simplest ways to gain knowledge yourself.
Vlad referred us to a podcast episode about NPCs. That's key: "inner monologue" and "NPCs" are manifestations of a single phenomenon. It seems like that crystalline thought is not clearly recognized, though.
The fact that this fact is not well known nor researched makes me very suspicious. We can't win if most people aren't really even people.
As to the second sentence, it's dead wrong. People are exactly as they have always been, it's just that we must recognize that we were quite gravely mistaken in our unconscious assumptions as to how they were. Oh, and I believe we can win, but not if we stubbornly and arrogantly persist in that ignorance.
As to the first sentence, I've had precisely the same thought. But look again at this thread: did anyone write anything like I just have? I didn't say anything particularly brilliant, but I have thought about it a lot. So when I look at how far I got on the subject, maybe it really shouldn't be much of a surprise to me or anyone else.
Final note: If anyone has read this far and is thinking, "What an arrogant jerk! Who cares what this a-hole has to say?", well, stop and think for a moment before typing your biting and witty reply. It will just reinforce my case, won't it?
The podcast is rather cynical and is a political analysis from someone who has escaped the left-right demoKKKrat-Republican polar paradigm. I recommend the podcast to those still holding on to some hope that the Republican party can be salvaged or to those who are disenfranchised conservatives or used to be.
LegalMan is a former attorney. Seems at one point he used to be a conservative and Constitutionalist practicing law as licensed attorney and then realized that the movement is hijacked by Republican party and scammers. Many of his podcasts mock and give commentary on frauds like Glen Beck and Mark Levin. Other podcasts focus on Lysander Spooner's literature and how the country was fucked by the Civil War.
a) DIALOGUE, noun [Gr., to dispute; to speak.] - "conversation or conference between two or more persons".
b) the few suggest DIALOGISM, noun - "a feigned speech between two or more" by tempting oneself to have an internal monologue about the suggested information by others, hence simulating a feigned speech between two or more within ones memory.
c) speech represents the internally suggestible; sound represents the externally perceivable.
d) a MONOLOGUE, noun [Gr. sole, and speech.] - "a soliloquy; a speech uttered by a person alone" implies PER (by) SONOS (sound), hence between perceivable sound and ones perceiving resonance...not the dissonance shaped by consenting to the suggestions of others.
e) if ones internal monologue is shape in words, then one utilizes the suggested tools of miscommunication (suggested words over perceivable sound) from others. One doesn't need to brand what one thinks about..it represents ones choice to "want" to think in terminology (description of perceivable through suggested) by others.
Perhaps I can clarify some things about how the mind works. We actually have multiple parallel thought processes all the time. We only know of the main focus at the top of consciousness, but there are others running. For example, we always have a 'survival-related' loop of thought running that examines our environment for threats, looking for the tigers. If we get too distracted from it by looking for daisies, this could harm us.
A problem with the average person is that they are, or get, lazy and turn everything over to the automatic processes and they coast along like NPCs. Only when something is sufficiently strong to drive deviation of focus to what's important do they do what's needed. For instance the tiger bites them and they wake up. In our socioeconomic/political situations, it takes starvation or physical peril for the NPC to wake up.
Great comment and analogy.
Well ... I HOPE ... because that's the only hope ... BUT I DON'T THINK IT WILL !
I felt this once in my life. I was the most hung over I had ever been and sitting at work and realized I hadn’t had a thought in my head all morning / afternoon until this one. It was literally like just blank no thought entered or left. I was just there. Who knows what else I did the night before ... I was young but obviously did something to my brain. Short lived thank God. I then remember thinking “oh this is what really dumb people must feel like all the time.” It was an interesting feeling for sure.
LOL
I've been in a drunken slumber before. Alcohol begins to wear off and i'm just slumbering, drooling, looking for some goyslop to eat.
I also think if you were raised with a religious background that taught you to pray in your mind to God a lot that it helped to develop that inner dialogue
Interesting thought. The ancients developed lots of good things that they didn't understand but were important. So, they became parts of religion/culture.
Sorry but all the religious people that i know ARE DUMB AS FUCK ... AND SHEEP TO THE CORE !
It's no fucking wonder the BIBLE HAS SO MANY VERSES CALLING PEOPLE SHEEP !
I'm 90% convinced that a strong inner monologue tendency develops when a person desires or needs to discuss things with others but can't find anyone willing or able to discuss xyz things, for example say a person grows up in a family or social environment where there is a huge elephant in the room so to speak, they notice it glaringly but everyone around them either acts like it's not real or has a cold silent attitude about it ie acting like it's very taboo to acknowledge it, that person is then much more likely to develop a strong inner monologue to meet the need of socially processing things that everyone else seems to either dissociate from or willfully ignore, so it makes a LOT of sense that many people branded as "conspiracy theorists" would have a strong inner monologue, ie people who hone in on things that most people don't want to acknowledge let alone discuss
You realize the premise of the article is there are different modes of thinking and that inner monologue or internal dialogue is just 1 of them. That is the point of the article. This is not new either. It is basic psychology.
The key part is that a stream of thought that is similar to reading or hearing a sentence is not the only method.
I would argue the bigger problem is the pushing that feelings/emotions is a method of thinking and it is not. It is a method of Sensory or maybe perception. The real problem of this is that we must temper our feelings and can use them to understand experiences but should not use them to make decisions.
Someone lacking an inner dialogue questioning all stimuli are more prone to acting upon emotions, peer pressure, and instinct.
If CNN scares you about the virus, and you don't have an internal skeptical voice in your head questioning what you are being told and trying to corroborate facts and data, then you are going to act upon the emotional fear perpetrated by CNN jew news propaganda.
If a black criminal attacks police and gets shot, and you are a dumb instinctive negro who will riot and loot because you cannot mentally have a dialogue and consider all facts and that the negro had just sexually assaulted a woman in front of children (Jacob Blake), then you are going to respond and act like an ape.
The internal monologue is important. It's a reasoning mechanism. A check and balance against being a mindless NPC.
SO the article is not suggesting that internal questioning is not happening. It is suggesting the questioning is not always in the form of a narrative such as a string of words. Some times it is in the form of pictures/images, conceptual understandings or (IMHO wrongly) emotions.
The article is not suggesting some people are "mindless".
For what it is worth I think some people have turned over critical thought to out side agencies for ________. "Fill in the blank reasons."
I do not believe anyone is born without the ability to have internal conscious thought and analysis short of some form of disability. I do entertain the possibility that the processes that in place now are designed to cause people to give up or distrust their own internal analytical processes. I also admit and think it is probable that the PTB are trying to create/breed/change people to have little to no internal analytical processes. In other words the effort of the PTB is to turn people in to barely thinking Animals.
Fair take.
The author mentioned in the article, Russell Hurlburt, seems to suggest that no one has an internal dialogue going on 100% of their time. They reference the mindlessness of pouring ourselves a cup of coffee. Maybe we aren't thinking while we are doing it.
He seems to suggest that no one is 100% mindless or mindful all the time. Only to degrees. Also, some people are more mindful than others.
The masking and fake vaccine compliance proved to me that most people are as mindful as a cow moo'ing while it chews on grass.
a) sameness represents the impressing origin of what can one think about, while all those with the ability to think represent the differences within.
b) different minds are being subjected by the same input (perceivable inspiration), yet tempted to ignore this for subjecting themselves to other differences (suggested information).
To make this worse...others suggest differences under the brand of "sameness". The many "want" to come together, while ignoring the "need" to sustain apartheid (living) within sameness (process of dying). This mass ignorance allows the few to stay apart within the many who pretend to be the same, when coming together.
Wow what a great article I'm half way through it and it's fascinating. I believe my son suffers from this condition of no internal dialogue. Of course he has issues because he is 17 but I think he inherited some of his mom's bad mental traits. Fortunately he wants to join the Marines next year and that should help him have a purpose and guidance. Thankfully he is very patriotic and built like a tank.
Your son joining the marines may be a very bad idea.
He is going to serve the marines. But who do the marines serve?
The brainwashed nationalist in you who was brainwashed reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag and national anthem devotion might say it is to serve "the people."
I caution you to be more realist, and honest, and realize that our military, including the marines, are merely mercenaries for bad people.
Your son becoming a lowly paid mercenary for a corrupt government is not something I would encourage.
One of the most important things you can teach him is to learn to observe his thoughts.
I have an inner voice and I've never understood depression. I wonder if they are connected?
a) expression (living) within impressing (process of dying) aka growth within loss, can choose to repress oneself by burdening (depression) oneself with information suggested by others, hence consenting to fill up conscious memory with suggested information, instead of utilizing it for adaptation to perceivable inspiration.
b) "understanding" represents ones choice to want to stand under what another one suggests one to consent to. The more one stands under, the more depressed one feels by the burden one consented to stand under.
a) all represents one in energy, hence interconnection.
b) nature sets itself apart, from whole (loss) into partial (growth) aka being apart (living) within togetherness (process of dying), hence representing INTER (internal aka being within) CONNECT (fasten together) -TION (through action).
c) to wonder represents EMO'TION, noun [Latin emotio; emoveo, to move from.], which tempts one to ignore being (life) moved by (inception towards death), hence being within motion, while in need to resist the temptation to be moved from ones position.
This is why suggested temptation lures Alice into the Wonderland...
A better wording on my part would be, I've never experienced depression, even though I've seen the effects on the women of the world.
Also, inner dialogue has to help survive loneliness.
a) look around you...how could one, surrounded by everything, be lonely? Could the suggestions of others to unite, and the division shaped by trying to unite, tempt one into self imposed isolation, just to get away from all the conflict?
b) LONE, adjective - "solitary; single; standing by itself"...doesn't that represent every single "one" in existence? If existence represents a shared experience, then how could one discern self, perceive as self; comprehend for self...without being "one" self?
c) what if "alone" is being suggested to tempt justification for self imposed isolation (leave me alone), while containing a sleight of hand for those who resist suggested (fiction) for perceivable (reality)?
What if "alone" implies ALL (in) ONE aka all single (living) within one whole (process of dying)? What if all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power", hence internal/inherent power representing whole/partial aka loss/growth aka action/reaction aka flow/form aka balance/choice aka living/process of dying?
d) SURVI'VE, verb [Latin supervivo.] - "to outlive"...can the living outlive the process of dying? What if the few suggest survivalism to tempt the many to place fear and hope towards suggested outcomes, while ignoring to resist perceivable origin for the prolonged sustenance of self?
From the perspective of female...impression (process of dying) for expression (growth) adds the intercourse with the male, hence compressing offspring within the uterus/womb. All the infertile; promiscuous behavior tempts compression without sustenance from within, hence depressing the female.
What it's like living without an inner monologue - A look at the inner experience and the science behind it https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/inner-monologue-experience-science-1.5486969
Psychology professor Russell Hurlburt (left) has been studying what he calls inner experience for more than 40 years. He's written six books on the topic
The 5 main ways of thinking:
Inner speaking/ inner monologue - Ex. talking to yourself, hearing your voice or someone else or audibly recalling a phone number.
Inner seeing/ visual imagery - Thoughts with a visual symbol. Ex. picturing a memory or a place you wish you lived.
Feelings - A conscious experience of emotional process. Ex. feeling sad after the death of a loved one.
Unsymbolized thinking - No word or image associated with thoughts. Ex. pouring your morning coffee without telling yourself to.
Sensory awareness- Paying attention to a sensory aspect of the environment for an unimportant reason. Ex. hearing someone talk but seeing the light reflecting off their glasses.
According to Hulburt, not many people have an inner monologue 100 per cent of the time, but most do sometimes. He estimates that inner monologue is a frequent thing for 30 to 50 per cent of people.
"There are very big individual differences," he said, "Some people have absolutely none and some people have pretty close to 100 per cent."
I think they're literally turning onto zombies now
I saw some vaccinated guy and his face was all swollen up like he got a beat down. Probably just clotting in his face and extremities.
Also, another old fella in my church has stroked out twice since the johnson and johnson fake vaccines.
YES !
That's why we need a DEEP DEEP FUCKING RECESSION with AT LEAST 10% unemployment !
Over the last few years, I've been studying this phenomena and found that it's one entryway connecting to dozens of other subjects and leading into the story of the whole of human experience back to, well, the beginning of humans.
Now that sounds quite audacious, does it not? How could some rando on the Internet have stumbled into such knowledge? It used to surprise me too, enough to make me think I must be mistaken. But no, it no longer surprises me and I can point out why, right here in this post.
Take a look up and down the quite lengthy replies on this post: some interesting anecdotes, and lots of the usual nonsense of course, but the ones that attempted to engage with it on an "intellectual" basis just speculated and made naked assertions. It's what my old calculus teacher used to refer to as "fiat" and "hand-waving".
That is, almost no one attempted to actually investigate this idea, to explore it, most importantly to associate it with other phenomena. There were two exceptions:
Zap mentioned hylics. That's correct. People have recognized this phenomena for millennia, and collecting the knowledge others have gained is one of the simplest ways to gain knowledge yourself.
Vlad referred us to a podcast episode about NPCs. That's key: "inner monologue" and "NPCs" are manifestations of a single phenomenon. It seems like that crystalline thought is not clearly recognized, though.
As to the second sentence, it's dead wrong. People are exactly as they have always been, it's just that we must recognize that we were quite gravely mistaken in our unconscious assumptions as to how they were. Oh, and I believe we can win, but not if we stubbornly and arrogantly persist in that ignorance.
As to the first sentence, I've had precisely the same thought. But look again at this thread: did anyone write anything like I just have? I didn't say anything particularly brilliant, but I have thought about it a lot. So when I look at how far I got on the subject, maybe it really shouldn't be much of a surprise to me or anyone else.
Final note: If anyone has read this far and is thinking, "What an arrogant jerk! Who cares what this a-hole has to say?", well, stop and think for a moment before typing your biting and witty reply. It will just reinforce my case, won't it?
Ahh, get it off your chest anyway.
I refer to them as the unthinking, similar to the undead. They might seem like they think, but they don't.
No unique thoughts. Just repeating propaganda.
"safe and effective"
"new normal"
"systemic racism"
"I've tested positive for Covid. I now have bells paulsy and am paralyzed. Thankfully, i received muh fake vaccine shot, or IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WORSE."
"Coooo Woooooooooo Zun WiT DeeEee WuShuNz!"
I did not discover this article and topic by myself.
LegalMan mentioned it in his podcast called The Quash.
For anyone interested, here is the link:
The Quash - Apparently most people really are NPCs https://podcastaddict.com/episode/150815583
The podcast is rather cynical and is a political analysis from someone who has escaped the left-right demoKKKrat-Republican polar paradigm. I recommend the podcast to those still holding on to some hope that the Republican party can be salvaged or to those who are disenfranchised conservatives or used to be.
LegalMan is a former attorney. Seems at one point he used to be a conservative and Constitutionalist practicing law as licensed attorney and then realized that the movement is hijacked by Republican party and scammers. Many of his podcasts mock and give commentary on frauds like Glen Beck and Mark Levin. Other podcasts focus on Lysander Spooner's literature and how the country was fucked by the Civil War.
a) DIALOGUE, noun [Gr., to dispute; to speak.] - "conversation or conference between two or more persons".
b) the few suggest DIALOGISM, noun - "a feigned speech between two or more" by tempting oneself to have an internal monologue about the suggested information by others, hence simulating a feigned speech between two or more within ones memory.
c) speech represents the internally suggestible; sound represents the externally perceivable.
d) a MONOLOGUE, noun [Gr. sole, and speech.] - "a soliloquy; a speech uttered by a person alone" implies PER (by) SONOS (sound), hence between perceivable sound and ones perceiving resonance...not the dissonance shaped by consenting to the suggestions of others.
e) if ones internal monologue is shape in words, then one utilizes the suggested tools of miscommunication (suggested words over perceivable sound) from others. One doesn't need to brand what one thinks about..it represents ones choice to "want" to think in terminology (description of perceivable through suggested) by others.