Are strict religions more succeseful?

Gollum

Interesting article arguing that they are.

http://www.slate.com/id/2118313/

I think this argument makes a certain amount of sense. I also think that the argument that the Catholic Church is choosing the "worst of all worlds" approach applies doubly to WTS.

Markfromcali

Well my Precious, that does make a certain amount of sense from a sociological perspective.

It is interesting though that in some small organizations there is no such thing as enforcement, so the idea of strictness doesn't apply, but it is simply composed of rare individuals who naturally have the dedication and discipline to pursue a certain kind of work. Of course I don't even know if you'd call that religion per se, it's not a commodity or product anyway, it's more about what you do than what you get.

Satanus

I'm sure that it's true. The wt did better than the bible students did. Among the bahais, the strict branch did better than the loose disorganised one. The catholic did much better than the gnostic and the other christianities. The human animal likes to rally around a strong alpha figure. Wimps just don't do it for him.

S

blondie

Define

strict

and

successful

Didn't read article but the first thing that comes to mind is are they followers because of love or fear?

Quality or quantity

Blondie

the_classicist

I think consistant religions are the successful ones, which is why the Jehovah's Witnesses are bound to fail.

LongHairGal

Blondie:

Good points.

Also, is the religion based on a small group being looked up to by the masses? This really turns me off and it seems every religion ends up this way - even if it was not the original intention. Take christendom for example and every offshoot group including the dubs!

It is one of the evils of man that they want to set themselves over other people and oppress or enslave them.

metatron

Their was an in-depth study of this sometime back. The key factor is that a religion must maintain its unique identity

or face decline. In some areas, liberal churches like Unitarians are quite popular - but they must retain a unique

mission or need to exist in the world.

metatron

DanTheMan

That was a really interesting article, I don't share the "not necessarily" sentiment about a future America dominated by the religious right though.

Gollum

Dan,
I tend to agree. I think it's much harder for "liberal" churches to maintain that level of cohesion. On the other hand, I think a very similar phenomena occurs in other places on the liberal side. I think various secular organizations or beliefs, such as Greenpeace function very much like the churches talked about in the article. They offer a cohesion and sense of a group with shared believes that occur in groups like the dubs.
I just don't think the dubs are offering enough in trade to many of their members. They are isolating themselves to a large extent, but seem to be activly stifling the social cohesion that should occur in a group like that.

garybuss

Plan for a very good business aka religion.

***

Make HUGE promises.
Deliver nothing.
Blame followers.
Report huge expenses.
Solicit donations.
Make NO financial reports.
Produce a product.
Sell product.
Train sales people.
Schedule meetings.
Require attendance.
Claim spirt connection.
Blame spirits if possible.
Produce more product.
Have followers make product.
Require followers to sell product.
Revise product often.
Buy land.
Build buildings.
Have followers build buildings.
Recruit more followers.
Deliver nothing!

Are strict religions more succeseful?

Share this