Directions of Manipulation
In the previous articles, we have discussed the tools and techniques used in manipulating consciousness. However, as noted before, manipulation is a two-way process, and having clever tools and even the most cunning techniques alone is insufficient for the manipulator to achieve the desired effect: it is necessary to also obtain the appropriate reaction from the manipulated individual.
Therefore, all these techniques and tools must have specific targets, the influence on which evokes the required reactions. These targets include human ways of thinking and feeling, which are subtly warmed up so that the individual believes that certain decisions, beliefs, views, and even dreams belong to them and are not imposed from outside.
Of course, the notion of completely independent human thinking is illusory. We do not live in a social, moral, spiritual, or intellectual vacuum; we are carriers of certain views and values that are first shaped by parents, then friends and colleagues, professional and self-education, and various reference groups.
And, of course, there are structures engaged in manipulating consciousness that are always ready to provide information to fill this vacuum. As the saying goes, "nature abhors a vacuum."
Various forces constantly vie for the minds of people. What particular characteristics of human thinking and feeling do they rely on? How do they dismantle the psychological and intellectual defenses of individuals and entire social groups and communities?
Logical Thinking
Human thinking, in general, is a mental process of information processing and establishing connections between objects, their properties, and/or phenomena in the surrounding world.
Thinking enables finding connections between different phenomena, but for the found connections to truly reflect the true state of affairs, thinking must adhere to the laws of logic—the science of the forms, methods, and laws of human thinking activity.
Logical thinking involves obtaining reliable logical conclusions based on available information, using logical concepts and constructions. This type of thinking is characterized by thoughtfulness and conclusiveness, internal consistency.
Scientists identify three types of logical thinking:
Image-Logical: involving visualization, assuming a visual representation of a situation and operating with images of its components, objects, phenomena, and participants.
Abstract-Logical: using categories not existing in nature (abstractions, for example, mathematical formulas) and modeling representations not only between real but also self-created objects of thought.
Verbal-Logical: based on the use of language means and speech constructions.
We will not dwell in detail on the differences of each type of logical thinking. It is noteworthy, however, that manipulators typically appeal to logical thinking.
What makes logical thinking so vulnerable to manipulation? The reason lies in its transparency and well-studied structures. Unlike pre-logical and mystical thinking, manipulation with which is technologically impossible and can only happen in the form of improvisation, logical thinking is rational, and manipulators take advantage of this.
Intruding into the fundamentally understandable mechanism of logical thinking is not particularly challenging: it is sufficient to withhold certain facts or distort them, depriving individuals, and even entire societies, of the opportunity to make accurate conclusions.
Paradoxically, the more rational one's thinking is, the easier its logic is dismantled through manipulation. It turns out that the more "pre-logical," irrational, scientifically unconfirmed, or experientially unsupported beliefs a person holds, the less susceptible they are to manipulation.
Mystical worldview in all its forms helps the human psyche defend itself against malignant manipulative influences. The more traditional beliefs and taboos a person or society has, the clearer their worldview, making it more challenging to tune their logical thinking to produce false conclusions that lead to absurd and contradictory outcomes contrary to their interests.
