[kaffeemitsahne]

> since the unconscious understands language perfectly well or it would not understand the problem in the first place

Says who? It's quite ridiculous to assume all thinking happens in the form of language. Not even all conscious thinking does.

[namibj]

I can say from experience that one can treat unnamed abstract concepts like any other concept (e.g., a specific meaning of a noun is a good example of what I mean with "concept" here), they are just _much_ harder to recall due to the mental delay line storage requiring words for it's operation.

Thinking can be on a meta-level, and these meta-levels can be conscious or unconscious. More than 4 levels in total are unrealistic. Conscious thinking allows single-stepping the thought process and introspecting the paused state from a meta-level above. Unconscious thinking is more like a locally-executing, black-box API. It's possible to change it's behaviour from the next meta-level, but it's dangerous (I once collapsed from dehydration as I lost thirst, and since then I substitute full belly/acute low blood sugar for the traditional hungry feeling.).

You can sum the levels up from 0. The first unconscious level (non-meta) is 0, each further 1. The first conscious level is 0.5, each further 1.5.

E.g., thinking about how your crush consciously perceives your conscious behavior is 0.5 + 1.5 + 1.5 and with 3.5 at the limit of the comfortable meta-depth.

3 would also be analyzing how you consciously guide your unconscious control of a pencil when drawing a portrait. Low-level stuff is unconscious, but overseen by conscious, and to improve this drawing process, you have to go meta on it. Drawing itself is only 0+1.5, so not deep on a meta-level. Still deeper than dancing without regard for how you are perceived, which is unconscious oversight of unconscious motoric control. The oversight is needed to not end in a position that has you bang your head or kick someone.