There are books out there that talk about why it is so difficult to convince someone that they are wrong. Hassan and Singer specifically address destructive cults. Hassan refers to cult members under mind control and Singer under thought reform. They both imply the same thing; there are social psychological factors at play that shapes and controls a person’s reasoning without being perceived by the victim.
However, when reading these books I always wondered whether Hassam and Singer were being hypocritical. That is Hassan divided two ideologies, one that uses coercive persuasion and the other that respects the individuals views. Singer did the same in her book Cults In Our Midst. Check the link - http://factnet.org/mind-controlbrainwashingthought-reform-exists - scroll all the way down for a good explanation on the differences between cults and religions.
I agree that there are differences, however I have associated for a while now with other theists and there appears to be similarities. For example there are sociocentric and individualist cultures. Sociocentric places needs to groups and institutions and lesser to the needs of individuals, while individualist cultures places needs on individuals. Cults and political parties like the national socialists, Marxism, and certain countries that practice Islam are all sociocentric, and so are other religions that think as groups whether its protestant, orthodox and catholic. Taking this into account we can make an important point on how the Jehovah’s witnesses base their morals, they are totalitarian, they are sociocentric, they are all for the borg and nothing for the individual. Some religions are more extreme than others. But unlike Hassan\Singer, can we make a distinction between certain sociocentric ideologies?
Ever since these books have been published a number of peer review articles have been made to expand on this issue on how to convince others that they are wrong. It started with the story abouts the wolf that change its mind. Freud taught the conflicts between the ID\ego\super ego. Festinger expanded with Freud with his scientific theory of cognitive dissonance. Gilovich found how commonly we resort to confirmation bias. Ariely did some socio economic scientific studies on people and found that we are not rational. Tetlock concluded the we persuade ourselves, and there are more, but the point being is that we are irrational.
There is a cult component yes, but there is also a YOU component that we need to understand. Atheists are not free from this, it doesn’t discriminate, it’s a human thing. It’s sociobiological and environmental. The core problem comes from our reasoning.
David Hume was the first to find this flaw - reason is and ought only to be the slave of the passion, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them.
