Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} Is A Cinch! by James Maratta Top 10 Brainwashing Techniques. The term “brainwashing” was invented by reporter Edward Hunter during the Korean War to describe the “re-education” techniques that the Chinese used on captured American soldiers. The term has since become associated with , which often use a combination of psychological methods to render their members compliant. The argued that at any given time around 2.5 million people in the US alone are members of cults known to use brainwashing techniques. However, the idea of brainwashing has always been controversial. Hunter was associated with the intelligence community and it has been suggested that the CIA promoted the term as an easy way to explain away the rapid growth of Communism at the time. The Robert Lifton and Edgar Schein concluded that American POWs who made anti-American statements mostly did so to avoid physical punishment, and that brainwashing of POWs was not particularly successful. It is thus important to be aware that there is some debate as to what exactly constitutes brainwashing and how effective it can be. 10 Chanting And Singing. The act of chanting mantras is an important feature of many religions, especially Buddhism and Hinduism, and almost every church has some sort of hymn-singing worship. As every member of the congregation chants or sings the same words, their voices combining into one chorus, a strong feeling of oneness and group identity forms. This, along with known effects of singing like lowered heart rate and relaxation, might cast the group worship experience in a positive light. But in cults the persistent repetition of short intonations is designed to become mind-numbing, eliminating logical thinking and inducing a trance state. Heightened suggestibility is a feature of such a state, and failure to maintain the trance is often followed by -inflicted punishment, ensuring that ultra-conformist behavior is continually enforced. Psychologists Linda Dubrow-Marshall and Steve Eichel have studied how “being subjected to repeated and prolonged hypnotic inductions can impair the convert’s ability to make decisions and evaluate new information,” adding that “continuous lectures, singing and chanting are employed by most cults, and serve to alter awareness.” In this way, hypnosis through chanting is a tool used by cult leaders to erode critical thinking abilities rather than for meditative purposes. 9 Isolation. In 1977, Jim Jones and around 1,000 members of his People’s Temple religious group moved to an isolated commune in Guyana. Some 400 kilometers (250 mi) of jungle separated them from the US Embassy in the Guyanese capital Georgetown. As Edward Cromarty points out, such isolation helped the cultists to “lose focus on the values of the outside world,” leaving Jones free to instill his own terrifying regime. Those who questioned Jones would be put into drug-induced comas or even have pythons wrapped around their necks. Rebellious children were lowered into wells at night. The cult’s geographical isolation was thus paralleled by a mental one. Far from the influence of their friends and family in the USA, with brutal punishment awaiting them if they failed to conform, the members of the People’s Temple had little choice but to mutely follow Jones’s poisonous ideologies, even if they were inwardly uncomfortable with what was happening. In its total control over its members and enforced isolation, the People’s Temple Agricultural Project bears comparison with pariah states like North Korea or pre-1991 Albania. 8 Dependency And Fear. The 1974 abduction of heiress Patty Hearst by the Symbionese Liberation Army is a classic example of brainwashing via dependency and fear. Hearst was quickly transformed from a young socialite into a bank robber and apparently committed member of a terrorist organization. After she was captured, Hearst was locked in a cabinet and physically and sexually abused, while being repeatedly told that she might be killed at any time. The SLA had total control over her life. This dependence on her captors led to the well-known effect of capture-bonding, or Stockholm Syndrome. Months later, she emerged as an ideologically devoted member of the organization, even participating in the robbery of a San Francisco bank. After Hearst was captured by the police, the prosecution refused to acknowledge her brainwashing and argued that she was fully compliant with the terrorists. She was thus sentenced to seven years in prison. However, President Carter commuted her sentence after two years on grounds of the “degrading experiences” that she suffered as a prisoner. Although Hearst may have been more impressionable than most, her story is a testament to the way that distressing experiences can transform who we are and what we believe in. 7 Activity Pedagogy. How does a teacher encourage good behavior and conformism from their students? The answer often involves integrating some kind of physical activity or sport into their teaching. Absorbed in jumping on the spot or running around, and tired as a result, children are less likely to argue or make trouble. Recognizing this phenomenon, several cults have aimed to occupy members with endless series of tiring activities as a means of control. For example, some suspected cults like Dahn Yoga are on the surface just physical exercise systems. In Russia, mass sporting events like calisthenics in stadiums were a recognizable feature of the Soviet system, and are associated by historians with the repressive state apparatus. What separates activity pedagogy from mere sports is that a regime or cult will take advantage of the heightened mood and group identity experienced after physical activity to introduce ideological beliefs that might otherwise be met with skepticism. Exhaustion by exercise is yet another way that people’s defenses can be worn away as means of encouraging them to accept questionable ideas. 6 Sleep Deprivation And Fatigue. A combination of sensory overload, disorientation, and sleep deprivation crumbles our ability to make good decisions. The multi-level marketing corporation Amway has been accused of depriving its distributors of sleep during weekend-long functions, which feature non-stop lectures running until the early hours of the morning, with only brief interludes during which bands play loud music complete with flashing lights. A cult technique sometimes used in conjunction with sleep deprivation involves instructing members to follow special diets containing low amounts of protein and another important nutrients. As a result, the cult members will always feel tired, rendering them powerless to resist the dictates of cult ideology. On the 20th anniversary of the Aum Shinrikyo sarin nerve gas attack, the Japan Times interviewed a former cult member, who described “eating one meal a day and sleeping a couple of hours each night” while working on an attempt to get the cult’s leader elected to parliament. 5 Self-Criticism And Finger-Pointing. During the Korean War, American soldiers captured by the Chinese were subjected to “criticism and self-criticism” sessions in which they had to denounce fellow prisoners, discuss their own faults, and express their insecurities about capitalism and the US. At first, the POWs thought that the sessions were childish. Yet over time, the ongoing process of criticism started to cause them to manifest real doubts about their patriotism and the validity of the war. Psychologist Robert Cialdini would explain the growing anxiety of the prisoners as an effect of the “rule of commitment,” which says that we try to keep our thoughts consistent with our public statements, since we do not like to be erratic or dishonest. Despite some limited successes, the Korean War “brainwashing” methods were not particularly effective overall. Only 23 POWs refused repatriation at the end of the war and the Chinese had mostly abandoned the reeducation sessions a year before the war ended. However, they continued to use similar practices domestically. The Tibetan Panchen Lama is pictured above during one such session of public abuse in 1964. 4 Love Bombing. Cults wish to reinforce the impression that the world outside the group is threatening and gravely in error. To make themselves appear welcoming in contrast they often employ “love bombing” to makes themselves appear welcoming in contrast. Love bombing involves showering new or potential recruits with lavish and demonstrations of attention and affection. The term probably originated with either the Children of God or the Unification Church, but can now be applied to a number of different organizations. It is a commonplace of social psychology that we feel strongly inclined to reciprocate the kind behavior and generosity of others, so the feigned love, encouragement, and friendship shown by established cult members towards initiates is designed to create an increasing sense of obligation, debt, and guilt. Margaret Singer called this a key feature of cults, effective because companionship and validation are precisely what many new cult recruits are looking for. The psychologist Edgar Schein argues that people are initiated into cults through a process of “unfreezing and refreezing.” During the unfreezing stage, a potential new cult member begins to reject his old world view and becomes open to the cult’s ideas. During refreezing, the cult solidifies this new outlook. Schein points to love bombing as a key element of refreezing—recruits who accept cult philosophy are rewarded with hugs and compliments, but are shunned if they ask too many skeptical questions. 3 Mystical Manipulation. Psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton argues that many cults rely on “mystical manipulation” to achieve total control of their followers. Mystical manipulation refers to the control of circumstances or information by cult leaders to convey the impression that they command supernatural wisdom, divine favor, or magical powers. In other words, purported religious leaders promote themselves as God’s infallible messenger, whose opinion must always be true and right, and support this via stunning tricks and extraordinary gimmicks. George Roden, one of David Koresh’s early challengers for the leadership of the Branch Davidians, theatrically exhumed a corpse, which he pledged to return to life to prove his necromantic powers. He challenged his rival to do the same, but Koresh simply reported him to the police for grave robbery instead. The police asked Koresh for proof and a gunfight ensued when Koresh’s faction tried to gain entry to the compound where Roden was keeping the corpse. Koresh himself was actually known as Vernon Howell at the time, but later changed his name to suggest descent from the biblical King David. He adopted the last name Koresh after Cyrus the Great, a Persian king who freed the Jews from Babylonian Captivity. Koresh created a messianic persona and encouraged his followers to attribute unusual experiences to divine intervention when he, in fact, had orchestrated them. 2 Barratrous Abuse. Many cults employ lawyers to sue anybody who publicly criticizes them, no matter how trivial the criticism. Of course, the cults can usually afford to lose the lawsuits, whereas ex-cult members are often insolvent after giving their lives to the organization. Many ex-cultists are therefore in no position to mount an effective legal counterattack. Moreover, mainstream journalists are scared to condemn cults or cite cult material, due to the ever-present threat of legal action. In 2003, investigator Rick Ross obtained excerpts from the manuals of NXIVM, a self-improvement organization accused of cult-like activities. Ross put the excerpts online, only to be hit with lawsuits and investigators rifling through his trash. A number NXIVM employees who have left the organization have faced hefty lawsuits. A judge dismissed one such case, noting that the employee in question had merely attempted to leave, only to be “labeled as ‘suppressive,’ a term that NXIVM applies to former associates who leave the company or whom NXIVM perceives to be its enemies, and subjected to protracted litigation from two large law firms and a phalanx of attorneys.” Scientology is also famous for using frivolous lawsuits to discourage opposition. L. Ron Hubbard wrote in 1967 that “we do not find critics of Scientology who do not have criminal pasts” and that lawsuits should be used to silence these inherently guilty critics. “The purpose of the [lawsuit] is to harass and discourage rather than win.” Well aware of the consequences of upsetting Scientologists, HBO preemptively hired 160 lawyers to defend their 2015 documentary Going Clear . Deterred from striking back in the courts, the church mounted a “brutal” campaign against people who appeared in the film and director Alex Gibney. There's No Such Thing as "Brainwashing" Nearly 40 years ago, my two sisters, Carolyn Layton and Annie Moore, were among those who planned the mass deaths in Jonestown on Nov. 18, 1978. Part of a movement called Peoples Temple, which was led by a charismatic pastor named Jim Jones, they had moved with 1,000 other Americans to the South American nation of Guyana in order to create a communal utopia. Under pressure from concerned relatives and the media, however, they implemented a plan of group murder and suicide. Jonestown is remembered in the phrase “drinking the Kool-Aid,” because more than 900 people died after drinking poison-laced punch. My two sisters and nephew were among those who died. In the wake of this tragedy, you might think that I would be amenable to the idea that they had been brainwashed. It would absolve their heinous actions and offer an easy explanation for their behavior. Many argue that people join “cults” – or “new religious movements,” the term scholars prefer – because they’ve been brainwashed. The thinking goes that they’ve undergone some sort of programming that allows others to manipulate them against their will. How else to explain why people become immersed in fringe groups that seem so alien to their previous, more socially acceptable lives? How else to account for the fact that – in some cases – they’ll even commit crimes? But like the word “cult,” the term brainwashing seems to only be applied to groups we disapprove of. We don’t say that soldiers are brainwashed to kill other people; that’s basic training. We don’t say that fraternity members are brainwashed to haze their members; that’s peer pressure. As a scholar of religious studies, I’m disheartened by how casually the word “brainwashing” gets thrown around, whether it’s used to describe a politician’s supporters, or individuals who are devoutly religious. I reject the idea of brainwashing for three reasons: It is pseudoscientific, ignores research-based explanations for human behavior and dehumanizes people by denying their free will. No scientific grounding. Brainwashing is used so frequently to describe religious conversions that it has a certain panache to it, as if it were based in scientific theory. But brainwashing presents what scientists call an “untestable hypothesis.” In order for a theory to be considered scientifically credible, it must be falsifiable; that is, it must be able to be proven incorrect. For example, as soon as things fall up instead of down, we will know that the theory of gravity is false. Since we cannot really prove that brainwashing does not exist, it fails to meet the standard criteria of the scientific method. In addition, there seems to be no way to have a conversation about brainwashing: you either accept it or you don’t. You can’t argue with someone who says “I was brainwashed.” But real science seeks argument and disagreement, as scholars challenge their colleagues’ theories and presuppositions. Finally, if brainwashing really existed, more people would join and stay in these groups. But studies have shown that members of new religions generally leave the group within a few years of joining. Even advocates of brainwashing theories are abandoning the term in the face of such criticism, using more scientific-sounding expressions such as “thought reform” and “coercive persuasion” in its stead. Conversion, conditioning and coercion. Once we move beyond brainwashing as an explanation for people’s behaviors, we can actually learn quite a bit about why individuals are drawn to new ideas and alternative religions or make choices at odds with their previous lifestyles. There are at least three scientific, neutral and precise terms that can replace brainwashing. The first is “conversion,” which describes an individual’s striking change in attitude, emotion or viewpoint. It’s typically used in the context of religious transformation, but it can describe other radical changes – from voting for the “wrong” candidate to joining Earth First! It can be sudden and dramatic, as in the case of St. Paul, who had been persecuting the early church but then stopped after supposedly hearing a voice from heaven. Or it can be a slow and gradual process, similar to the way Mahatma Gandhi came to understand his role and mission as a leader for Indian independence. We usually think of conversion as a voluntary process. But when we look at accounts of well-respected converts – St. Augustine comes to mind – we find exactly what the philosopher William James said we would: Converts begin by being passive recipients of a transcendent, life-changing event. They don’t plan for it; it just happens. But they cannot go back to the way things were before their experience. Next, there’s conditioning, which refers to the psychological process of learning to behave in a certain way in response to certain stimuli. As we grow up and experience life, we become conditioned by parents, teachers, friends and society to think and feel in certain predictable ways. We get rewarded for some things we do and punished for others. This influences how we behave. There is nothing evil or nefarious about this process. Studies have shown that many of the people who seek out new religions may be predisposed or conditioned to finding a group that fosters their worldview. But what about the nice people who, in rare cases, end up doing terrible things after joining a ? Again, the process of conditioning seems to offer some explanation. For example, peer pressure has the powerful ability to condition people to conform to specific roles they are assigned. In the Stanford Prison Experiment, participants were randomly assigned the role of guard and prisoner – with the guards soon becoming abusive and the inmates becoming passive. Meanwhile, deference to authority, which Stanley Milgram studied in his famous 1961 experiment, may encourage people to do what they know is wrong. In the case of Milgram’s experiment, participants applied what they believed were electric shocks to individuals, even as they heard simulated screams of pain. And finally, coercion can also help explain why people may act against their own values, even committing crimes on occasion. If someone is told to do something – and threatened with physical, emotional or spiritual harm if they don’t – it’s coercion. Just because someone carries out an order, it doesn’t mean they agree with it. Prisoners of war may publicly denounce their home country or claim allegiance to the enemy just to survive. When they are released from captivity, however, they revert to their true beliefs. In other words, coercion – or exhaustion, or hunger – can make people do things they might not otherwise do. We don’t need a theory of thought reform to understand the power of fear. A denial of agency. True believers certainly exist. My sisters fall into that category. They sincerely promoted the cause of the Peoples Temple – no matter how misguided it was under the leadership of Jim Jones – because of their deep commitment to its ideals. This commitment arose from their conversion experiences and their gradual, conditioned acceptance of ethical misbehavior. I do not consider them brainwashed, however. They made decisions and choices more or less freely. They knew what they were doing. The same is true for members of the Branch Davidians: They accepted and believed the word of God as interpreted by David Koresh. Bodies of victims of Jonestown mass suicide are loaded from U.S. Army helicopter at Georgetown’s international airport, Nov. 23, 1977. AP Photo. If brainwashing actually existed, we would expect to see many more dangerous people running around, planning to carry out reprehensible schemes. Instead, we find that people frequently abandon their beliefs as soon as they leave coercive environments. This fact does not address the difficulty of leaving certain groups, whether they’re political parties, religious movements, social clubs or even business organizations. Nevertheless, people can leave these groups and abandon their beliefs – and do. Should we consider situational hurdles and peer pressure forms of brainwashing? If that were the case, then everything – and nothing – would constitute mind control. We have studies that illuminate processes of conversion and conditioning. We have historical examples that demonstrate what people do under compulsion. The brainwashing explanation ignores this social scientific research. It infantilizes individuals by denying them personal agency and suggesting that they are not responsible for their actions. The courts don’t buy brainwashing. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. Best of 2018. In closing out 2018, we are sharing some of our overall favorites. Click through to the original post on the title. As you weed, be sure to share with us any of your favorites. (Send us pictures, not the actual books!) Share your thoughts in the comments. Peace, love, and stable library funding for 2019. Leisure Suit Lotus Yoga: The 8 steps to health and peace Hittleman 1975 Yoga books are a good thing. Yoga in a leisure suit? Not so much. Flattering Feline Fashions Cat Knits Coss 1988 Because everyone wants a giant cat to wear. Don’t miss the other choices! Brainwashing for Fun and Profit Brainwashing is a Cinch! Maratta 1966 Taking crazy to a whole new level. Don’t Hold the Mayo! That Amazing Ingredient: Mayonnaise CPC International 1979 Yum? Living the Fallout Life Fallout Shelter Handbook West 1962 Getting ready for the end. Feline Folly Test Your Cat’s Personality Sourcebooks 2008 My cats get an “A” in evil. Groovy Sweaters Women’s Day 101 Sweaters You Can Knit and Crochet Saunders, editor 1973 More groovy knitting one must see . Drink Up! Urine Therapy: Nature’s Elixir for Good Health Peschek-Bohmer and Schreiber 1999 I think the title is all you need to know. The brainwashing myth. Nearly 40 years ago, my two sisters, Carolyn Layton and Annie Moore, were among those who planned the mass deaths in Jonestown on Nov. 18, 1978. Part of a movement called Peoples Temple, which was led by a charismatic pastor named Jim Jones, they had moved with 1,000 other Americans to the South American nation of Guyana in order to create a communal utopia. Under pressure from concerned relatives and the media, however, they implemented a plan of group murder and suicide. Jonestown is remembered in the phrase "drinking the Kool-Aid," because more than 900 people died after drinking poison-laced punch. My two sisters and nephew were among those who died. In the wake of this tragedy, you might think that I would be amenable to the idea that they had been brainwashed. It would absolve their heinous actions and offer an easy explanation for their behavior. Many argue that people join "cults" – or "new religious movements," the term scholars prefer – because they've been brainwashed. The thinking goes that they've undergone some sort of programming that allows others to manipulate them against their will. How else to explain why people become immersed in fringe groups that seem so alien to their previous, more socially acceptable lives? How else to account for the fact that – in some cases – they'll even commit crimes? But like the word "cult," the term brainwashing seems to only be applied to groups we disapprove of. We don't say that soldiers are brainwashed to kill other people; that's basic training. We don't say that fraternity members are brainwashed to haze their members; that's peer pressure. As a scholar of religious studies, I'm disheartened by how casually the word "brainwashing" gets thrown around, whether it's used to describe a politician's supporters, or individuals who are devoutly religious. I reject the idea of brainwashing for three reasons: It is pseudoscientific, ignores research-based explanations for human behavior and dehumanizes people by denying their free will. No scientific grounding. Brainwashing is used so frequently to describe religious conversions that it has a certain panache to it, as if it were based in scientific theory. But brainwashing presents what scientists call an "untestable hypothesis." In order for a theory to be considered scientifically credible, it must be falsifiable; that is, it must be able to be proven incorrect. For example, as soon as things fall up instead of down, we will know that the theory of gravity is false. Since we cannot really prove that brainwashing does not exist, it fails to meet the standard criteria of the scientific method. In addition, there seems to be no way to have a conversation about brainwashing: you either accept it or you don't. You can't argue with someone who says "I was brainwashed." But real science seeks argument and disagreement, as scholars challenge their colleagues' theories and presuppositions. Finally, if brainwashing really existed, more people would join and stay in these groups. But studies have shown that members of new religions generally leave the group within a few years of joining. Even advocates of brainwashing theories are abandoning the term in the face of such criticism, using more scientific-sounding expressions such as "thought reform" and "coercive persuasion" in its stead. Conversion, conditioning and coercion. Once we move beyond brainwashing as an explanation for people's behaviors, we can actually learn quite a bit about why individuals are drawn to new ideas and alternative religions or make choices at odds with their previous lifestyles. There are at least three scientific, neutral and precise terms that can replace brainwashing. The first is "conversion," which describes an individual's striking change in attitude, emotion or viewpoint. It's typically used in the context of religious transformation, but it can describe other radical changes – from voting for the "wrong" candidate to joining Earth First! It can be sudden and dramatic, as in the case of St. Paul, who had been persecuting the early church but then stopped after supposedly hearing a voice from heaven. Or it can be a slow and gradual process, similar to the way Mahatma Gandhi came to understand his role and mission as a leader for Indian independence. We usually think of conversion as a voluntary process. But when we look at accounts of well-respected converts – St. Augustine comes to mind – we find exactly what the philosopher William James said we would: Converts begin by being passive recipients of a transcendent, life-changing event. They don't plan for it; it just happens. But they cannot go back to the way things were before their experience. Next, there's conditioning, which refers to the psychological process of learning to behave in a certain way in response to certain stimuli. As we grow up and experience life, we become conditioned by parents, teachers, friends and society to think and feel in certain predictable ways. We get rewarded for some things we do and punished for others. This influences how we behave. There is nothing evil or nefarious about this process. Studies have shown that many of the people who seek out new religions may be predisposed or conditioned to finding a group that fosters their worldview. But what about the nice people who, in rare cases, end up doing terrible things after joining a new religious movement? Again, the process of conditioning seems to offer some explanation. For example, peer pressure has the powerful ability to condition people to conform to specific roles they are assigned. In the Stanford Prison Experiment, participants were randomly assigned the role of guard and prisoner – with the guards soon becoming abusive and the inmates becoming passive. Meanwhile, deference to authority, which Stanley Milgram studied in his famous 1961 experiment, may encourage people to do what they know is wrong. In the case of Milgram's experiment, participants applied what they believed were electric shocks to individuals, even as they heard simulated screams of pain. And finally, coercion can also help explain why people may act against their own values, even committing crimes on occasion. If someone is told to do something – and threatened with physical, emotional or spiritual harm if they don't – it's coercion. Just because someone carries out an order, it doesn't mean they agree with it. Prisoners of war may publicly denounce their home country or claim allegiance to the enemy just to survive. When they are released from captivity, however, they revert to their true beliefs. In other words, coercion – or exhaustion, or hunger – can make people do things they might not otherwise do. We don't need a theory of thought reform to understand the power of fear. A denial of agency. True believers certainly exist. My sisters fall into that category. They sincerely promoted the cause of the Peoples Temple – no matter how misguided it was under the leadership of Jim Jones – because of their deep commitment to its ideals. This commitment arose from their conversion experiences and their gradual, conditioned acceptance of ethical misbehavior. I do not consider them brainwashed, however. They made decisions and choices more or less freely. They knew what they were doing. The same is true for members of the Branch Davidians: They accepted and believed the word of God as interpreted by David Koresh. If brainwashing actually existed, we would expect to see many more dangerous people running around, planning to carry out reprehensible schemes. Instead, we find that people frequently abandon their beliefs as soon as they leave coercive environments. This fact does not address the difficulty of leaving certain groups, whether they're political parties, religious movements, social clubs or even business organizations. Nevertheless, people can leave these groups and abandon their beliefs – and do. Should we consider situational hurdles and peer pressure forms of brainwashing? If that were the case, then everything – and nothing – would constitute mind control. We have studies that illuminate processes of conversion and conditioning. We have historical examples that demonstrate what people do under compulsion. The brainwashing explanation ignores this social scientific research. It infantilizes individuals by denying them personal agency and suggesting that they are not responsible for their actions. The courts don't buy brainwashing. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. 'Brainwashing': A History. The English language has a good number of compounds (“a word consisting of components that are words”), words such as spoilsport , killjoy , and asshead . For the most part the meaning of these words is easy to decipher, so long as one had a rudimentary grasp of the meanings of each of their constituent parts: a killjoy is one who is harmful to your enjoyment, a spoilsport is a person who ruins your fun, and an asshead is … well, this one is a bit metaphorical, relative to the others. It turns out that teasing out the meaning and history of some compounds is trickier than others, when the words involved are being used in a non- literal fashion. Brainwashing gives us a splendid example of this. American children have been brainwashed into worshipping Davy Crockett, who was a “juvenile delinquent who ran away from home,” Harper’s Magazine said today. – The Washington Post and Times Herald (Washington DC), 1 Jul. 1955 We were brainwashed into buying these WEAREVER TRIPLE PAN INSERTS that will make any pan into three. Look the other way and snatch up a few for kicks. Gilded they’d make charming fruit baskets, and grandpa would love a few to hide his false teeth in around the house. — Albany Democrat-Herald (Albany, OR), 19 Aug. 1959. This extended sense (“persuasion by propaganda or salesmanship”) is now commonly found, along with the “forced indoctrination” sense. The “scrubbing a brain with saline solution,” despite clearly having been used first, has so far failed to capture the public’s interest. Because the English language, much like life, just isn't fair.