In Chinese word, one word means a lot.
For instance, the word "yong" means the following from my dictionary:
1) linear & 2) continuous
Whenever a word is attached to "yong", the meaning of "yong" would then be explained by either (1) or (2). Here are several phrases started with "yong":
b. long day
c. soul immortality
d. mourn (for the dead)
e. home sick
Chinese words are formed by combining partial characters so we need to know index characters in order to find our words in a dictionary. After we find the word, we can see different phrases that start with the word. Then we choose the most proper phrase according to our situations. Like choosing one phrase from (a, b, c, d, e, f) if one decides to use “yong” in a sentence.
Normally a index characters defines the characteristic of the word. Like "water" for instance, any word with index character "water" attached means that the word contains fluid characteristic, such as ocean, river, swim, oil, steam ...etc.
I think LGAT may try the same language forming method by attaching its unique index character to participants’ vocabularies. So rather than turning off participants’ reasoning, LGAT instead changes their reasoning into abstract meaning through the addition of unique index characters. The whole reasoning section would become abstract.
For example, if I create an index character which has “ambiguity” characteristic and attach this index character to all the words in a dictionary, then I would have a new dictionary with every word contains “ambiguity” characteristic.
One may need to remove such index character to recover the reality. This is just a thought of mine.
Interesting observations, Hsuchi. One would have to be highly skilled in both languages to come up with the ways that people are manipulated, in Chinese, for example. The concept of "guilt," for instance, was or is much more effective at controlling people in the past or where more people believe in an "after-life" where they might be judged or called to account for their deeds before some higher power. Nowadays, especially in Western cultures, there is far less belief in such things as "divine" retribution or intervention. By convincing people, with special tricks and tactics, that there was a diety waiting for you to die when he could punish you, various religions could control pretty much everything people did or said. In Landmark, this allegience, obligation, or reponsibility to a god is redirected towards the "self," - or a higher or better "supreme" self, which is their "integrity," I imagine. That is why many people see the similarities between Landmark and "satanism," for in "satanism," one answers only to oneself, not a higher or greater, more social or collective good/god. That is why Landmark is called "solipcistic" or self-referential.
Some more buzz-words, jargon words, or words used to convey special meaning within Landmark are:
cause ("at cause")
How do these concepts translate into Chinese and how are the Chinese manipulated by them? I would think the overlapping portions of Confucionism and Protestantism that involve "salvation through hard work and sacrifice" are of usefulness to the Landmark corporation or anyone who wants to take advantage of the free or cheap labor of others. Are the Chinese people more or less willing, do you suppose, to entertain the idea that they could become enslaved by "European" ideologies? (Actually, a sort of European "perversion" of Eastern ideologies.)