Just illustrating a little difference between casuitry/human experience and scientism.
Science: Many memories that we have in our heads are actually not correct memories. What has instead happened is that we stored a large collection of bits and pieces of memories and used imagination to fill in the blanks. The blanks filled in by imagination may be plausible, but they might not be accurate. It’s easier to remember through patterns than to remember large amount of raw unorganized information. This means that the power of suggestion and leaving our mind to fill in the blanks can convince us of things that are not true. In fact, people have come to believe things, just because it is impressed on them by constant repetition, not because they initally believed it. Repetition allows reinforcement and self-rationalization of what is repeated, until you are talking on the terms of the one who kept impressing it into you.
Casuitry: Mere difficulty in resisting temptation or not believing something is not the same thing as those two things being impossible - hence, it is pointless to argue that mind control is possible, because the choice to accept something is ultimately always in a person, and can never be owed to some invisible power of psychological manipulation.
While the former is a good counter-response to those who think a large number of people are deliberately stupid or evil to believe in dangerously wrongful things, the latter is a good counter-response to those who think mass media and public school system are some “indoctrination” that forcefully change the way people think.
So mind control - possible or not possible?