You have probably felt a connection between why you sometimes choose to use an uncommon word—for you—and with what you think a moment later. You might intuitively sense that there might be a logical explanation behind it—on contrary of being mystical—but it doesn’t seem to be within your grasp.

In conversations understanding that connection will highly probably take longer than finishing current sentence as in those situations there is usually lot of other things to think about. Understanding that connection is probably easiest, when the mind is warming up to the idea that something certain will happen to oneself and which differs from what has recently happened to oneself and what he tends to think about. Such happening might e.g. be about taking a car and go to some place which hasn’t been visited by him for a long time: subconsciousness gets activated from relevant parts like those related to stopping at certain gas station after driving on the certain road for about certain time. Before that leads to any kind of mental images for the conscious mind to deal with, subconsciousness have already began producing ideas that turn into words in the speech. What gets said will probably sound as sensible as it normally would, but direction of a conversation might get shifted, because of what just happened—if one didn’t bother to stop himself from saying what he feels he is about to say. It could be said that thoughts began their travel to the consciouss mind, but it’ll take a moment or few moments until they get there. Explaining what is happening and why gets a lot more complicated, when choosen words—and maybe even gestures and microexpressions—differ a lot from a typical day, but still do fit rather nicely to the flow of conversation.

It would be justifiable, from security aspect, to ask can such be included in a social manipulation toolbox (social engineering); could one by accident slip something like a password to some computer system consisting of two words, even when he wouldn’t say it in full or even partially? It is very difficult to prevent oneself from saying too much, if nothing that has already been said seems to imply that there would be any danger from it. It is not so difficult to foresee what will get discussed, if one is having a conversation with someone familiar to him, but if he doesn’t know the interlocutor very well, but he seems nice, it is practically impossible to prevent one’s working memory from burdening by trying to reflect one’s own thoughts in realtime and that discussion may flow to almost any direction.

Receipt for ruining someone’s changes for using an ability they yet don’t haveIt is quite typical for some people to improve their chances by undermining those of others. It is less burdening for one’s own mind than learning something completely new and becoming better that way, isn’t it? One way to distinguish some other from oneself is to ”fill the area” in that someone’s mind that is ”reserved” for something that he is about to become familiar with or might be interested about later in the future with rubbish.

Practically this requires that

a) target person must actively deal with choosen subject in a way that creates new thoughts and connects with earlier ones andb) deal with the subject in a situation, which wouldn’t be suitable for learning it andc) something irritating would occur in that situation — which would lead to a possibility that later recall of related memories, concepts etc. would be harder, slower or even gross.

Because brain is normally rather plastic (neuroplastiticity) throughout the life, effects will not be permanent, but damage done might affect the navigability of target person’s life especially if effects are maintained by those others. It might also be laborious to reorganize one’s mind, if it comes to that.

Julkaistu alunperin Medium-tilin kirjoituksissa.