Weekly Voice Insights #107 -What Choice Sounds Like
John Doyle begins his August 28, 2026 Fire Engineering article, “The Hero Trap: Beyond Ego,” with Marcus Aurelius, using the passage to challenge the idea that Stoicism is simply about suppressing reaction. In Meditations 8.5, Aurelius writes:
“Secondly, look steadfastly at the thing, and see it as it is…”
The passage continues from seeing the situation accurately into the question of how we act and speak in response. Epictetus approaches a related question through the faculty of choice. In Discourses 1.1, he distinguishes between the body and the faculty of choice. I paraphrase that distinction this way: “You are not just voice and flesh, but also choice and character.”
"Choice and character" are closely connected because our choices do not simply disappear after we make them. Repeated often enough, they begin to form a habitual disposition, what the Greeks called ēthos. Character in that sense is less an abstract quality than a pattern of conduct that has become relatively stable.
Some of those patterns are easy to recognize. I have a morning ritual, and writing this blog has become part of it. Other habits are less intentional and may tell me more about myself: how quickly I become irritated, how much attention I give to a petty grievance, whether I feel compelled to answer every disturbance that comes my way. Small irritations are plentiful enough that responding to all of them would require an enormous amount of energy.
The leadership article also employs a surprising amount of vocal language. The author describes the urge to “command the room” or become the “loudest voice.” Under pressure, people stop listening, deflect feedback, lash out, shut down, lecture, or create an environment in which others eventually stop speaking.
As a singer and voice teacher, I experience tone as the result of a process already underway. Intention affects what I prepare to say, breath responds to that intention, and tone becomes part of what another person actually receives. I may intend one thing, produce another, and discover the difference only when I listen to what actually emerged.
A trained voice depends on repetition. Years of physical and vocal work create responses that eventually become available without requiring conscious management at every moment. There is something worth being grateful for in having a body and voice that continue to respond and serve.
Habit, of course, does not distinguish between what I meant to practice and what I happened to repeat. Impatience can become practiced. So can interruption, defensiveness, or the tendency to withdraw. What has been repeated often enough can begin to feel natural simply because it has become familiar.
That is where prohairesis, the faculty of choice, becomes more demanding. I find myself connecting it with the Italian word volontà, partly because I associate will with continuing to search, try, work, and improve. Yet Epictetus is asking for something more precise than determination. The question is what I do with what presents itself to me, what judgment I make about it, and how that judgment enters my conduct.
Voice and body are part of how that choice becomes visible and audible. I do not have complete command over either one, but I can become more aware of how I use them and of the habits that have formed through repeated use.
The leadership article argues that leaders can become preoccupied with appearing certain, strong, or in control, and that this performance can interfere with listening and responding. I hesitate over the phrase “letting go of the performance,” because performance itself is not the problem. As a singer, I may rehearse a role for weeks and still have to hear what another singer is doing in the moment, respond to the conductor, and adjust to what is actually happening around me. A prepared performance still depends on responsiveness.
The same is true of the sound itself. I can make a phrase louder, fuller, or more technically beautiful and still miss what the words require. The sound may be impressive while remaining too general for the thought or situation. In conversation, something similar can happen when the effort to sound decisive, composed, or authoritative begins to override the meaning of what is being said or the response of the person in front of me.
Marcus Aurelius asks us to look at what is there and know it for what it is. Epictetus repeatedly returns responsibility to the faculty of choice. In voice work, there is a related kind of examination, although it does not necessarily happen while we are speaking. In teaching, I often encourage people to pay attention to how the sound feels physically in the mechanism while they are producing it, rather than trying to monitor how it sounds in the moment.
Listening can come afterward. When I hear a recording or think back on a conversation, I can ask whether what came across was what I intended. Did the tone carry the emotion I meant to communicate? Did the sound support the words, or did something else take over? That kind of listening can reveal a difference between intention and result that may be difficult to notice while the exchange is happening.
For me, that returns the question to choice. I cannot change the response that has already been made, but I can become more aware of what happened and let that awareness affect the next one.
Inner Check-In
- When you listen back to yourself, does the tone match what you intended to communicate?
- What kind of response do you find yourself repeating when you feel challenged or irritated?
- What might you choose differently the next time that response begins to form?






.png)