Most people also seem to agree that both reason and emotions are involved in the workings of conscience and that it is the most natural part of our human nature, whether we are religious or not. When reason or the heart or both decide what ought to be done, we often feel emotionally drawn to it, or even emotionally divided (as believed by Hume). Following one's conscience, therefore, often implies that the whole being, body, mind and heart, is involved in some way when making the decision. We may often feel 'pangs of conscience' after doing what we consider to be the wrong thing or experience feelings of approval if we believe we have done the right thing (the reflective aspect of conscience has elicits emotions, similar to Freud on the Superego). McDonagh says 'Conscience enables us to judge good and evil, reproaches us when we have done wrong, gives us peace when we have done well'. In this sense, conscience, although a deep part of us, appears to exist simultaneously as a separate entity, often standing over and against us as a judge or supporter. Conscience also implies personal responsibility, as argued by Mahoney who argued that 'conscience is not a still small voice, it is simply me coming to a decision. When I say 'my conscience tells me' all I am really saying is 'I think' (Conscience = the mind coming to a moral conclusion, not a separate faculty. This is similar to MacNamara). This concept of responsibility for all actions that arise from the conscience is in stark contrast to Aquinas who argued that when one has Invincible Ignorance, they are not morally culpable for acting immorally