I’m tossing from side to side in bed, tired from the buzzing of thoughts in my head, from an aimlessly lived day and suffering from insomnia for a long time... A light breeze takes over my consciousness, and the buzzing of thoughts and thoughts falls silent. A long-awaited dream...
Suddenly, at the most peaceful moment, a very distinct and sudden male voice calls me by name and asks something.
"A?! What?!"- I jump up in horror. The body is shaking, the heart is jumping out of the chest. I don’t understand what’s happening... Sticky sweat glued me to the wrinkled sheet.
This happens every night. Scary to go to bed. It’s hard to deliberately delay bedtime for fear of sudden, incomprehensible voices. It frightens, it’s stressful, it doesn’t give you peace.
Feeling crazy
I was one of those people who was able to “talk to people” without opening my mouth. It is not even necessary that the interlocutors themselves be present. I talked to them in my head. Sometimes they spoke on their own without my “invitation.”
I had the "ability" to play music without turning it on real mode. She's in my head. Now the classical music is circling in a big way, now the rock is screaming and rumbling. The chaotic mixture of internal dialogues mixed with music caused terrible discomfort. This made my head feel heavy and buzzing, as if there was a swarm of voiced thoughts in my head.
Strange things were happening in my apartment. From time to time rustling sounds or sounds of falling dishes and the creaking of a door were heard. Or a loud male voice might call me from the kitchen. When I came to the kitchen, the voice called again, but from the room...
At some point I realized that I was hearing voices in my head. The sounds and voices were so realistic that they were frightening. My mind refused to believe it, but the increasing frequency of cases with polyphony in my head forced me to figure out what was happening. And the more I thought about exterminating the voices, the louder and more intense the endless dialogues were scrolling inside.
At night I had dreams. Noisy, mocking, booming. I heard voices and an indistinct echoing accompaniment. Half asleep, it was unclear where reality was, where the dream was.
Voice hallucinations
I asked some close friends if they had such conditions. I tried to calm myself down, thinking that everyone normal person hears something like this and there is nothing unusual about it. After asking a couple of friends, I realized that I was the only one hearing voices. And you won’t find a person in the world who will understand me and say: "I'm like that myself", - and will tell me the secret truth of the origin of voices.
It became difficult to talk to people. As soon as I asked my interlocutor a question, I immediately stopped hearing the answer: internal dialogue resumed and gave absolutely no chance to concentrate. The man speaks and answers me, and at this time I look through him and have been leading him for a long time. self talk. Sometimes an attentive interlocutor saw my indifference, my disconnection from the conversation, and happily retreated.
Who would like to communicate with a person who does not listen to you. The reasons for my acquaintances to avoid me are obvious. Have excellent hearing and not hear people. This made me feel great internal contradictions. Hearing voices in your head, but not real people.
I hear voices in my head: what to do?
Telling someone, asking for advice about hearing voices is the same as admitting your stupidity. It's the same as saying: “I’m weird, I hear voices. Don't avoid me, please. I just got a little crazy!”
Day after day, hundreds of dialogues were scrolling through my head, many of them actually sounded. I even answered out loud the questions that were asked to me. From the outside it looked like a dialogue without one interlocutor. But what about it? I have to answer the questions that have arisen - after all, they ask me...
It is well known that those who talk to themselves and hear voices are included in the “lists” of crazy people. In any case, their heads are definitely not right. I am sick - mentally ill - the only thing that arose and became fixed in my understanding.
Today I have no internal annoying dialogues or voices. They are gone forever. Sleep is normal and sufficient. The energy to live and do things appeared. There is no room for apathy. We managed to find the field of activity that fills the voids of the sound vector and gives impetus to mental work. Which, by the way, brings great, indescribable pleasure. Finally, I live.
Whatever worries you, give yourself a chance, come to free online training on system-vector psychology Yuri Burlan. Register using the link.
Galina Poddubnaya, teacher
Chapter:
(Reading time for the answer is about 5 minutes)
Typically, this question is answered with Vygotsky's and Watson's ideas about micromovements. vocal cords, accompanied by an inner voice, but I believe that these explanations start from the assumption that people who say what they hear inner voice they actually hear something. But what behavior is meant by “hearing” and how does “hearing the inner voice” differ from simply “hearing the voice”? I believe that we talk about the inner voice not because there is an immaterial voice or because of the micro movements of the vocal cords, but because it is easier to talk about events that have already happened or have not yet happened, as if they were happening right now, but " in my head." We hear the inner voice, because if we do not hear it, it will be very problematic to explain behavior controlled by distant events in the past or events in the future. I'll explain now.
I believe that "hearing" is "acting as if there is a sound source", i.e. I say “I hear” when I can in response to the question “Where does the sound come from?” indicate the source in space. The phrase “He hears a sound” appears when behavior changes in the presence of a sound source that can be removed and the behavior returned. For example, I say “He is listening to music” (meaning that the location of “saying that he is listening to music” coincides with the location of my body in space and time) when someone sticks to the window or does not respond to my cues with headphones plugged in , which look like they are working (connected to the phone, and the phone looks like it is working). I don't say "He's listening to music" when I have headphones disconnected from the phone, or when a person with headphones is talking to me (obviously, the use of the phrase "He's listening to music" is not limited to these situations, but let's take them as an example). To hear a sound is to behave as if there is a sound in the presence of a sound source.
Accordingly, “hearing a voice” can be understood as special case“hear sound” (as well as a special case is “listen to music”), i.e. act as if there is a voice in the presence of the source of the voice. I say “John heard Jane's voice” when John, after hearing a sound, behaves as if the sound was associated with Jane (e.g., calling her; saying it was Jane). I say “I heard Jane's voice” when “hearing Jane's voice” (acting as if the sound was associated with Jane (looking for her, calling her, saying it was her)) coincides in time and space with my body.
I believe that "hearing the inner voice" means "behaving as if there is a voice when the source of the voice is separated from the behavior not in space, but in time." "Hearing the inner voice" from "hearing the voice" can only be distinguished by details of the context - I say "John heard Jane's voice" when there is Jane whom I can ask to shut up and John's behavior will change. In the case of “John thought he heard Jane,” John acts as if he hears Jane's voice, but there is no Jane whom I can ask to shut up in order for the behavior to change. At the same time, such a situation does not require reference to an unobservable voice in John's head for explanation.
Why does John act as if he can hear Jane's voice when Jane is not present? Let's look at the behavior that is meant by "hearing Jane's voice." For example, I'm walking next to John and suddenly he says that Jane's voice makes him come home. To explain this behavior, do I need to say that there really was some unobservable voice (Jane at the time on the other side of town) that provoked John to tell me that Jane was forcing him to come home and go home? Not necessarily, this behavior can be understood by looking at the broader context, not spatially (as in the case when the sound source is far from the behavior), but temporally.
For example, when John quarrels with Jane and goes outside - upon his return, Jane scolds him for running away from the conversation, respectively, when I call John outside - he goes out, because I respond to attempts to refuse with persuasion, but he tells me that Jane when he returns will nag him so that I still let him go home and acts as if Jane is already nag him when I try to argue with the fact that Jane will nag him, because 1) it helps convince me, 2 ) talking about Jane provokes behavior as if Jane is there, because the word "Jane" and events associated with Jane are connected. Accordingly, the phrase “Vanya, I’m sorry, I’m going home, I can just hear how she’ll nag me if I take another walk” can be understood as “Vanya, I’m now acting as if Jane is already here and nagging me, so I’ll go home to reduce sawing frequency." The reference to the inner voice can be analyzed without reference to the immaterial inner voice, it can be understood as a reference to the material voice that sounded once upon a time or will sound in the future.
The picture below shows the difference in context that provokes conversation about the “real” and “imaginary” voice. I talk about a real voice when I see the voice controlling the current behavior next to the current behavior (for example, they say “Go home” and I go home - the behavior and voice are almost in the same time, but in different points space). I talk about an imaginary voice when I see the current behavior, and the voice that controls it either has not yet been heard, or has been heard a long time ago (see picture).
Another example. The sound from the speaker is “real”, because if you turn off the speaker (“remove the sound”), the behavior will immediately change (if a person dances when the speaker is on, and stops dancing when the speaker is off, we say that the sound is real). The sound of thoughts is “imaginary” because it is not clear what to do to “turn it on” or “turn it off”, i.e. make behavior consistent with other thoughts or lack of thoughts appear. For example, if a person is dancing and I don’t see a speaker around that can be turned off so that he stops dancing, I say that imaginary music is playing in his head. But does it make sense to say that there is some kind of music playing in his head if all I see is that the person behaves as if there is music playing somewhere? I don’t see any music and cannot distinguish between “dancing to imaginary music” and “dancing to real music.” Having looked at the behavior itself, I come to this conclusion due to the absence of an external factor that can be influenced to change the behavior. This is a dubious criterion, because how “dancing to real music” can be explained by the work of the speaker ( external factor), and “dancing to imaginary music” can be explained by an external factor (for example, in an advertisement on the street in a company of people, the dance was followed by smiles and laughter, so in the company of friends I start dancing, they smile and laugh). No "imaginary music" is needed to explain this behavior. Dance in the absence of sound can be understood in terms of events that have happened before or will happen later.
Similar logic applies to cases that seem extremely difficult to explain without “imaginary” sound—for example, cases where a person sits and “listens to thoughts.” It seems that this behavior cannot be explained without recognizing that the sound of thoughts is immaterial or trying to pretend that it is material, we simply do not have the equipment to record it (Vygotsky tried to resort to such tactics), but such meditative behavior can be explained by external material events - for example, that “listening to thoughts” is simply sitting still with eyes closed, which is designated by the word “listening to thoughts,” because if you say “I’m sitting motionless with my eyes closed,” this raises questions (“haha, why are you sitting like that?”), and self-report of thoughts that are “heard” is controlled by the questions asked and the situation (for example, “What are you thinking about now?” provokes “About what I’m thinking about now” or “Nothing” or “What to eat for the evening” or a bunch of other options that are controlled by the history of interaction verbal behavior and environment, and not by “unobservable” thoughts located inside the head).
To summarize, I am talking about a "real" voice when current behavior can be explained by current events. I talk about the inner voice when current behavior cannot be explained by current events; to explain it, one must refer to events remote in time, and not just in space. The practice of everyday communication encourages us to talk about the real voice, which has already sounded or has not yet sounded, as being in our heads, because if we explain our behavior through such complex spatio-temporal connections, our speech will become terribly overloaded. We hear the inner voice, because if we do not hear it, it will be very problematic to explain behavior controlled by distant events in the past or events in the future.
Level of development of modern Russian psychiatry: naphthyzine for sinusitis. It’s good that lobotomy and electroshock therapy are not used.
The fact is that each specific case is purely individual, and the approach is unified.
The approach should be comprehensive and person-oriented, including the work of not only the pharmaceutical department, but also psychotherapy, genetics, etc.
Treating exclusively with sleeping pills and antipsychotics is, in my opinion, barbaric.
What about the maintenance of those undergoing treatment? In a hospital (clinic) it is worse than in prison. And now I Not O compulsory treatment by court decision.
Do you know what happens to those who refuse to sign consent for treatment? They are still being treated. They are treated forcibly until the poor fellows sign the Agreement.
And it’s good if there are concerned relatives.
Let's return to the conditions of detention. Of course, the more the clinic is funded, the fresher the paint on the walls and the better the food, but tell me, have you heard anything about isolation wards? Patients spend long weeks, months, and some even years in them, looking at the ceiling in the company of the same unfortunate people. The lack of ventilation and the need to relieve oneself in a bucket leave their mark not only on the physical, but also on the psycho-emotional state. Bright lighting around the clock promotes the activation of cancer cells. And a rarely opened door and tightly closed barred windows take away not only the already limited freedom, but also the chance to escape in the event of a fire or other incident.
And in the general wards it’s not much better.
Let us now turn to the consequences of personnel performance.
Medical visits are carried out once a week. Most patients, when taking antipsychotics (especially long-term), begin to feel side effects. To remove them, the doctor, after a round, prescribes some kind of anticholinergic drug, which relieves only part of the side effects. And the side effects are very diverse: from banal tremor to incontinence. The period of adaptation to the “pill after pill” is relatively short. The patient continues to suffer until the next doctor comes, calling the orderly, the nurse, and begging for a miracle pill. But he will never receive any pills, except perhaps an injection of a strong sleeping pill, after which the sufferer will be tied to the bed for several days.
By the way, I was very surprised when I found out that straitjackets are not in use.
The human body is imperfect and can remind itself at the most inopportune moment, for example, toothache or neuralgia, when a person is in psychiatric hospital. And he will be very lucky if help is provided the next day after applying. Don't forget about the weekend public holidays and vacations.
I would like to mention the strict dosage of connection with outside world. Telephone, computer - prohibited, TV (if any) - in a strictly allotted narrow period of time.
In conclusion, I’ll mention a few nice little things:
if you refuse to take medications orally, forcibly intramuscularly;
jewelry is not allowed, with the exception of a cross on a thin thread;
sexual activity is not encouraged;
experimental use of drugs can be carried out “at random”.
It is wrong to force innocent patients, citizens, people to undeserved suffering, but to demand complete healing, recovery and dignity full life Right.
Health and prosperity to you, thoughtful reader!
Perhaps everyone knows what a person’s inner voice is. Many people think that this is something hidden, true, the voice of the subconscious, which certainly knows what we need and what is best for us. Meanwhile, if a person’s inner voice says something bad, it does not necessarily have to be the ultimate truth. So what should you do when your inner voice speaks—listen to it or not?
Voice in our head
Let's say you decide to ask your boss for a promotion. You are almost ready for a heated argument, but suddenly you hear a voice somewhere in your own head: “Better sit quietly and keep a low profile, otherwise you will be thrown out of work altogether.” Or, let’s say, you came up with the idea of enrolling in a painting course for amateurs. Did you think that such activities could become have a good rest and bring variety to gray life. But your inner voice whispers: “Why do you need this at this age, you’ll only embarrass yourself, you don’t have a drop of talent.” Your enthusiasm immediately bursts like a soap bubble...
Is this a familiar situation? Probably everyone has encountered something similar. They say that when someone hears voices, they should immediately see a psychiatrist. But we will not be talking about such a phenomenon at all. Our inner voice is our inner critic, which acts as an effective brake system. Its task is to extinguish enthusiasm, destroy self-confidence, and strive to pull us down by our feet. At the same time, he is very inventive in coming up with excuses and always finds some reasons for inaction.
If the inner voice says nasty things, and we allow it to control our life, then we will live it colorlessly, we will not try anything new, because we will be paralyzed by fear and doubt. In 99% of cases, it stops us in our tracks, and, as you know, whoever does not move forward moves backward.
Inner voice = intuition?
Overestimate the value internal monologues or dialogues with ourselves, we are prone to because we often mistake them for our real “I”, signals from the subconscious, intuition. For some people, glimpses of intuition really only happen in the form of voices. They say they clearly hear something in their head. How to distinguish this help from the cosmos, the Universe, from the internal brake?
In fact, it is very simple: glimpses of real intuition never criticize, do not engage you in controversy, and do not explain anything. The task of intuition is to protect us, so the “messages” from it will be short and simple: “don’t go there,” “go down another street,” “call home,” and so on. You don't hear in your head that you don't need to go somewhere because you won't cope with something or you'll get lost. Intuition does not say: “Don’t go there because you are in danger.” And the inner critic has only one goal - to weaken us morally and turn us into its victim. Therefore, it is worth getting rid of it or at least learning to control it.
How to stop the war between your ears?
Many people find themselves having more than one voice. And this is not at all a reason to feel crazy or to slip into depression because of internal monologues. This phenomenon needs to be dealt with somehow just because it blocks the realization of dreams.
- The first step to victory is to look at yourself from a distance, with the eye of an observer, and also to change your point of view. Believe that you are not a toy, not a pawn in the hands of the cosmos or the world, you are, if not the only, then one of the main reasons for your own actions. When the inner voice once again begins to say bad things, what should you do? Ask yourself where this came from. Tell yourself that it is your inner voice, not yourself, and believe it with all your heart.
- Step two is to learn to allow yourself weaknesses, to openly admit that something went wrong or was done incorrectly. This gives a person enormous freedom, because he no longer has to hide his own weaknesses to himself and the world. Every person has light and dark side, angel and devil, hero and villain. The only question is who will win in a particular situation.
When your inner voice begins to whisper that you won’t succeed, that you don’t know how to do anything, energetically stop yourself and say “stop.” Don’t let yourself be drawn into this game of thoughts and mind, distract yourself with something from them.
PHOTO Getty Images
Those who hear “voices in their heads” do not understand that they belong to themselves. Another thing is what we hear when reading to ourselves. To answer this question, psychologist Ruvanee Vilhauer from New York University (USA) conducted a study summarizing and analyzing the experiences of people who “hear” their own inner voice while reading.
Vilhauer used user responses on the largest English-language question and answer site, Yahoo! Answers (At the end of 2009, the site had 200 million users and more than a billion questions and answers). She was able to find 24 questions on this topic posted on the site from 2006 to 2014, and 136 answers in which site visitors described their inner feelings while reading.
The majority of users (82%) stated that when reading to themselves, they “hear” a voice in their head, another 10% did not hear such a voice; from the remaining answers it was impossible to clearly understand what the person felt during the reading process.
Of those who heard the inner voice while reading, 13% did not always hear it, but only in some situations (which could depend on various factors, including the degree of their interest in the text), also about half of them always heard the same voice, for the rest it was different times"sounded" differently. At the same time, for example, speech different people in the text could be “voiced” in different voices, or the content of the SMS message or email could be “voiced” by the voice of its sender. According to several users, the same inner voice was “responsible” for their reading as for ordinary thoughts. Those who always heard the same voice usually believed that it was their own ordinary voice, which, however, could differ in timbre or tone.
Almost all site users who heard the voice while reading stated that it had some kind of sound characteristics– volume, timbre, accent, and so on. The degree of control over the voice varied - some found it distracting or even frightening, while others could easily change it through an effort of will.
It is noteworthy that most of those who left comments found them personal experience seemed to be one size fits all. For example, some commentators were sure that everyone heard a voice in their head while reading, while others might even consider this a sign of some kind of mental disorder.
For more details, see R. Vilhauer “Inner reading voices: An overlooked form of inner speech,” Psychosis: Psychological, Social and Integrative Approaches, 2016, vol. 8, no. 1.
