Contrarian Ideas

by larc 14 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  gravedancer

  Larc,

  It appears to be a set of semantic differences we are talking about and depending on the source we will receive different interperetations.

  I for one regard all religions as cults. But that is because of my definition of a cult is based on the following criteria as found at http://www.ex-cult.org/General/identifying-a-cult

  (PS: I believe this piece was actually written by Jan Goenveld).

  Another great site is this one from the American Family Foundation http://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm or http://www.csj.org/?37,11

  and also Trancenet http://www.trancenet.org/

  But for me it comes down to 1 primary factor: FEAR.

  If a religious group can control you by means of fear then they are a cult. I have yet to find a religion that does not do this (especially among the "Christian" faiths). The whole basis of Christianity is fear - obey God or die. When using fear of death, shunning or anything else to control behaviour we have a cult in the making.
• 

  larc

  GD,

  I would share your definition for certain discussions. Reason is that I share your view of all religion as being detrimental to the well being of individuals. Even with that agreement, I think that religions vary in the degree of harm that they do. In this regard, I think the standard definitions and distinctions provided by sociologists are useful ones.

  Disfellowshipping,

  Abaddon made the point that other religions don't resort to this practice. This is true, generally speaking. However, I would maintain that all organizations practice disfellowshipping, but that for most, the behavior has to be very extreme before expulsion is resorted to. Even major corporations do it. General Motors expelled two of their top level executives, John Delorean and Ross Perot. Delorean wrote about his experience in a book, "On A Clear Day You Can See General Motors."

  The tragedy of the JW practice is that they excersise this option so often and without considering other options. Also, it is true that you can leave most other religions because you change your beliefs, without being hounded, vilified, and shunned.

  My major point about disfellowshipping, however, was somewhat different than this analysis. My point is, that when you are shunned, why are so surprised and hurt? I know when I left, I fully understood what was going to happen. I didn't like it, but I was prepared for it, and moved on and got a new life.

  In the next exciting episode, I will try to get my arms around the subject of mind control, which I think is a complex issue.

  GD,

  One other thought. You mentioned that my use of language might be a case of "minimizing". While helpful to some in recovery, you posited that it could be harmful to others. I hadn't thought of it in those terms. I thought of it more in terms of objectifying (sp) the concepts which could lead to important distinctions where they do exist.

  For the inidiviual, I think their is a danger in "maximizing" the experience, that is, using highly charged, emotion laden terms to describe one's experience. I think that can prompt one to continually ruminate over how awful it was and how awful the JWs are. At some point, it seems to me, a person has to say, "too damn bad", and move on.

  Over and out, for now.
• 

  proplog2

  Larc you are not contrarian just old and educated.

  I would go a step further with the "cult" issue. Who can say that a "cult" is necessarily bad? It has been suggested by some sociolgists that "cults" are a way of incubating new structures and methods for an evolving society.

  In nature species form when a population is isolated from the whole. In the isolated state they take on unique attributes. When they eventally re-join the general population they sometimes come equipped with a repertoire of behaviors that enbable them to exploit certain niches. With a slight survival advantage the formerly isolated population replaces the original population.
• 

  larc

  Grave Dancer,

  I read with great interest, the first reference you provided. If gave a fascinating overview of methods commonly used to change people's minds and their behavior. Most of these I know, some I hadn't thought about but they made sense when I read them, and a few of them were new to me.

  The article can be divided into five categories.

  1. True brain washing techniques used in the conversion process.

  2. The role of the true believer personality type within groups with a mission or cause.

  3. Standard techniques of persuasion.

  4. The role of subliminal messages.

  5. Methods to produce altered states of consciousness that reduce critical thinking.

  Of these, I see no evidence whatsoever that the JWs use #1, brain washing techniques. I think that the two most important catagories are #2, the true believer, and #3, standard methods of persuasion. Both #4 and #5 are missing in their practices, in both their home book studies, and in their rituals at the kingdom hall.

  G.D., you asked if I am a "technician", and therefore make word distinctions. I make word distinctions because they can make a difference in understanding individual and group behaviour. It can also help policy makers understand how to deal with such behaviour when they face it. How one respondes to a sect member under stress can be quite different than a cult member under stress, for example.

  That's it for now.
• 

  patio34

  The disfellowshipping matter doesn't seem accurate. I don't believe any of us knew that you would never be able to walk away or just quit.

  I was considering some 3rd generation JWs with large families and how very difficult it would be for any of them to walk away. I know some here have done that. It must be very tough.

  Nope, it doesn't seem to me that we knew the rules about never being allowed to doubt or change our minds.

  For what it's worth.

  "It's easier to put on slippers than to carpet the world." (from "Stuart Saves His Family")