Perception Vs. Reality

[Anonymous]

I don't understand how someone who has never been to an AA meeting, does not have an addiction problem and never personally experienced the topic of discussion would be so willing to argue a general misconception to the teeth with someone who clearly has done much more research on the subject and DOES have personal experience with AA.

This is what I'm hearing from our guest:

"Psy is expressing his opinion in a way that threatens me."
"If the "experts" haven't said EXACTLY what Psy is saying then he MUST be wrong."
and "I dont really know anything about AA besides that it is widely accepted so it couldn't be a cult."

Do you realize how ignorant these arguments are?...

I may or may not agree with Psy, but it seems to me that the way he has researched the topic and the manner of which he decided to express his findings is not only appropriate, but also impressive. Over all I am not educated enough on this subject to challenge his opinions, but even if I was the last thing I would do is make the irrelevant arguments you have. This to me sounds like a personal vendetta not an educational debate.

LOL.  Well said.

And contrary to what the guest thinks (who continues to state "I have researched and he is wrong" (yet cites no research), appeals to authority, attacks sources I cite with ad-hominem, can do nothing but appeal to authority, and claims I have cited only one source....

I have cited many sources:
http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic. ... 53#p322008

And those are just the books that are online about the topic.

In addition, in this thread I cited sources directly from AA literature, from double blind studies done on AA members compared to alcoholics with no treatment, from AA's own studies, form personal experience, from Charles Bufe, Jeffery Schaler Ph.D and Stanton Peele Ph.D.

Again, our infinately honest guest LIES to personally attack Agent Orange (rather than his arguments) claiming that he promotes rational recovery and that Rational Recovery is a cult.

LOL.  First of all, if you bothred to click on the guest's own link claiming Agent Organge promotes Rational Recovery, you'll find that Rational Recovery is NUMBER FOURTEEN on his suggested reading list.  Also on that reading list is just about every single alternative AA and book on aa imaginable.  LOL.  And this guest who has "done his research" (lol) accuses Rational Recovery of being a cult when they don't' even have meetings. LOLOL

And our guest writes:

Speaking of have I been to A.A., psy, and you to a lesser extent, are creating a catch-22. People who have been to A.A. and think it's ok or helpful are brainwashed, and people who have not and think it's ok or helpful don't know what they are talking about.

No, guest.  I didn't attack anybody's personal experiences at all nor did I say that AA didn't work at all.  What i DID do was cite several double blind studies.  You're the only one here usign anecdotal evidence and a whole slew of logical fallacies.

LOL.  and now our guest has been to AA. What changed?  LOL.  I stop a conversation when the person I'm arguing with starts to blatantly lie and generally swuirm agound.  I'm done here.

Huh? I haven't "LIED." Calm down. I am a long time contributer here. I find what your AA posts absurd, and trivializing of genuine thought reform and cultic abuse. I have xtra time now, so for the first time have bother responding to you. For the most part, i don't bother.



Some corrections:

LOL. Only you didn'g googloe "cult" and "AA" You googled "agent orange" and "AA". LOL. Trying to make it seem like he's the sole sources who has called AA a cult or cult-like. HERE is a google of "cult" and "AA"

I didn’t say I googled “cult and "A.A.” to get the orange papers.

I said your research isn’t original and, (particularly the points about A.A.being cultic) is the reiteration of points made by unreliable sources which can found within 30 seconds by googling “cult” and “A.A”.

That is not considered "research" academically.


Your links that relating A.A's cultism were l rangels and Orange, anonymous, perhaps unreal people.

Orange “recommends” The Rational Recovery Website and two books by J.T., who started the booming enterprise R.R., are in his “top ten reading” list beneath Charles Bufe’s book.

Orange says  “This book does what A.A. only claims to do — "give you the tools you will need to maintain sobriety". “
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-top10.html

My point was these people are not reliable sources and one seems to have something going on with Rational Recovery that may be a little fishy.

The other "citation," and "source" Charles Bufe makes up his own set of cultic criteria, and then declares that A.A. matches up with them
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chapter9.htm
""I've included them here as characteristics 3, 5, 10, and 12, though I've relabeled most of them, and I've reinterpreted all of them to some extent. I've also added two of the characteristics listed by Margaret Singer in her important recent book, Cults In Our Midst; here they're listed as characteristics 8 and 17. As a result of these additions, my list of cult criteria now includes 23 characteristics""

Bufe subtracts meaningful cultic measuremnet from Singer and Lifton and invents his own system which is hollow and unhelpful.



My  point is unless people are prepared to do original research on this matter themselves, which is very time consuming, they should go by reliable sources. Both Margret Singer and Rick Ross, reliable sources, have stated that A.A. is a group and not in the cult spectrum.

No, guest.  I didn't attack anybody's personal experiences at all nor did I say that AA didn't work at all.  What i DID do was cite several double blind studies.  You're the only one here usign anecdotal evidence and a whole slew of logical fallacies.

I don’t want to make  he/said she/said but if you read back(and haven’t edited anything) you are dismissive of people’s first-hand experience with X.A. If they say it was alright, you imply they are brainwashed, and you continually accuse people of being secret A.A agenda promoters. I've never sought treatment with A.A, as I said. I was forced into the X.A. programs. You even implied Bufe was brainwashed because he doesn't want A.A. discussed on his site

And contrary to what the guest thinks (who continues to state "I have researched and he is wrong" (yet cites no research), appeals to authority, attacks sources I cite with ad-hominem, can do nothing but appeal to authority, and claims I have cited only one source....

I've cited the research of Rick Ross and Margeret Singer. Remember? M.A's ENTIRE book is about how A.A. is not cult-like. When I fish it out of my trunks, I'll post her ORIGINAL research.

(getting depressed over how much time i waste....)

[Anonymous]

btw. I'm not saying that R.R. is a cult, I said it was accused of being a "cult"

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:bje ... cd=1&gl=us



"Hi Everyone! I think I just had a free rational recovery.I'd say its a new religion, that includes every man, woman, and child, here on earth.Think I found the basis to our bad behavior and mental illnesses. Our problem? Our hearts are broken.Spirits. A couple years ago I saw the symptoms to post-traumatic stress disordersee if you see yourself and everyone else somewhere in this)ANXIETY, CONFUSION, PANIC ATTACKS, FEARS, PHOBIAS, DEPRESSION, LOW SELF-ESTEEM, SHAME, GUILT, ANGER, INABILITY TO TRUST SELF OR OTHERS, NIGHTMARES, INSOMNIA,AMNESIA, VIOLENCE, SHY, HYPERVIGILANCE, HYPERCONSCIOUSNESS OF BODY AND APPEARANCE,SELF DESTRUCTIVE ADDICTIONS:ALCOHOL, DRUGS, EATING DISORDERS, SEX, GAMBLING,HOARDING, SHOPAHOLIC, PARANOIA, OCD, ADD, OUT OF CONTROL,ETC. When I saw this list I wondered if I was a trauma victim. When I was about 7 years old, a change came over me that has always had me puzzled. I became shy and full of anxiety. Later years I'd describe myself as drunk, angry, and out of control. I'm 53 now so I've been messed up quite awhile. Once I figured that all this pointed to a broken spirit, I started calming down. After a couple months I started to understand that this is what is wrong with alot of others. With time the list grew. After 5 months I wondered what was going on? I was sure defending the heck out of others. Answer= my heart was starting to work again. I was becoming more compassionate. After 9 months I figured everyone is totally innocent. A few months later I read the story of Adam and Eve again. They were naked and not ashamed. After the apple bit they were hiding, afraid, and self-conscious(put on fig leaves). Those are symptoms of PTSD.They started blaming everybody else too. There is no one to blame. This is the curse of mankind. We catch this hateful disease from each other. PTSD is not just for war vets and sexually abused children. bullyonline.com says that bullying is probably the biggest cause of it. I.E.: the other kids at school, our siblings, people at work, etc. For me I think it was chiefly the kids at school. Does't matter. Everyone gets infected with this, so I would of caught it from someone else. Anyway, before I stumbled on to this, I belonged more or less to the"religious right". I believed in the Devil and that most people were going to Hell, the world was going to end, and Jesus was going to come out of the clouds and save me. The only thing I think is going to end now is our present belief system. This mis-judgment of ourselves. I've got hope now in my fellow man and our future. I'm driving less, recycling more. For all the children and the polars bears sakes, please consider this. Love Gayle"

and

"prschuster declares that rational recovery is not a cult, despite Trimpey's "absolutist" ideas. "absolutist" sends up a red flag for me as absolutist ideology is at the heart of cultish thinking. prschuster has no objections to absolutist thinking, but indicates that what would make rr a cult would be if it practiced multi-level marketing. This kind of marketing can been defined as a scams or pyramid schemes, but certainly not cults. The fact is that Trimpey does practice multi-level (or pyramid) marketing. He offers his internet crash course for free (a single paragraph of simplistic ideas). But if this is not enough, he urges you to pay for the more extensive online mini-course. And if this doesn't work, you are urged to lay down a couple of thousand, plus traveling and lodging expenses, to attend his four day "class" in person. (He also offers a two day weekend "class" for the discounted price of $1400.) His website also offers several levels of subscription, one for those who are "tough cases" (his own words), which would require that they stay with rr for a longer period of time. There are weekly, monthly, and annual subscription "opportunities," and also a "patron" subscription level. If Trimpey didn't want to hook people in long-term, why would he offer these various subscriptions? And why in the world does a profit making organization have a patron category, a category usually available only through non-profit groups, such as symphony, art, and charitable organizations. These subscriptions are, in essence, donations. Why would anybody in their right mind donate to an organization that already makes a huge profit from "class tuitions," and the selling of the numerous Jack Trimpey products advertised on the site. What a HUGE scam!"

[psy]

I'm going to have to agree with Guest on this one. They make some good points and seem very knowledgeable on this subject. On the other hand, psy seems to get annoyed with the very idea anyone would dare challenge his anti-AA agenda. I think a lot of this has to do with psy wanting to prove to antigen that his views are in line with hers. I can't know for sure, but it seems like he goes out of his way to defend the conspiracy theories that dominate the thinking of fornits leadership. they think george bush and the cia put them in a program, and that 9.11 was done by the military, that AA is a cult like program.

Just for the record, I never said the government put anybody in a program or that there was any sort of conspiracy to that effect.  In fact, I stated quite the opposite.  I can't recall where 9/11 has been mentioned here aside from anybody but maybe Deborah... and I never said AA was a cult like program.  I said it was a cult-like religion with undue influence on our society and government.

[psy]

Huh? I haven't "LIED." Calm down. I am a long time contributer here. I find what your AA posts absurd, and trivializing of genuine thought reform and cultic abuse. I have xtra time now, so for the first time have bother responding to you. For the most part, i don't bother.

Some corrections:

LOL. Only you didn'g googloe "cult" and "AA" You googled "agent orange" and "AA". LOL. Trying to make it seem like he's the sole sources who has called AA a cult or cult-like. HERE is a google of "cult" and "AA"

I didn’t say I googled “cult and "A.A.” to get the orange papers.

I said your research isn’t original and, (particularly the points about A.A.being cultic) is the reiteration of points made by unreliable sources which can found within 30 seconds by googling “cult” and “A.A”.

Yes, you stated all the sources were unreliable without every specifically citing any false statements. It's blanket discrediting.

That is not considered "research" academically.

But I did cite academic research... LOL.  Lots and lots of academic research can be found on a google search.  What you're trying to imply is that because something can be found by a search engine, it's automatically false!

Your links that relating A.A's cultism were l rangels and Orange, anonymous, perhaps unreal people.

Unreal people?  I guess he must be an alien then.  Look. If you've read some of his "fan mail" he gets, you'll note threats and more.  I don't blame him for wanting to be anonymous, and that is his right.

Orange “recommends” The Rational Recovery Website and two books by J.T., who started the booming enterprise R.R., are in his “top ten reading” list beneath Charles Bufe’s book.

Orange says  “This book does what A.A. only claims to do — "give you the tools you will need to maintain sobriety". “
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-top10.html

My point was these people are not reliable sources and one seems to have something going on with Rational Recovery that may be a little fishy.

So guilt by association?  You manage to contort imply that RR is a cult (by one allegation by some extremely reliable source) and that AO is somehow "fishy" referring to them as an alternative that worked for him (despite the fact he lists MANY other alternatives).  I guess only anecdotal evidence to support AA is ok... LOL.  And you say I'm stretching it by implying AA is cult-like.

The other "citation," and "source" Charles Bufe makes up his own set of cultic criteria, and then declares that A.A. matches up with them
http://www.morerevealed.com/library/coc/chapter9.htm
""I've included them here as characteristics 3, 5, 10, and 12, though I've relabeled most of them, and I've reinterpreted all of them to some extent. I've also added two of the characteristics listed by Margaret Singer in her important recent book, Cults In Our Midst; here they're listed as characteristics 8 and 17. As a result of these additions, my list of cult criteria now includes 23 characteristics""

Bufe subtracts meaningful cultic measuremnet from Singer and Lifton and invents his own system which is hollow and unhelpful.

That's not quite true (you omit a lot).  He cited cultic characteristics from number of people, not just singer (such as lifton, etc).  He also concluded that AA was not a cult, but could be considered cult-like.  Have you actually read the book?

My  point is unless people are prepared to do original research on this matter themselves, which is very time consuming, they should go by reliable sources. Both Margret Singer and Rick Ross, reliable sources, have stated that A.A. is a group and not in the cult spectrum.

I addressed margaret singer and Rick Ross in this post: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=26470&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=75#p323045
I urge everybody to do their own research.  Sure authorities on subjects are often right, but not always...  If they were we would call them "infallible sources" and not "reliable sources".

I've cited the research of Rick Ross and Margeret Singer. Remember? M.A's ENTIRE book is about how A.A. is not cult-like. When I fish it out of my trunks, I'll post her ORIGINAL research.

(getting depressed over how much time i waste....)

I already posted the only quotation referring to AA in Margaret Singer's book. It's on page 97.

[Anonymous]

It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a sick society. . . i'm tired of being tormented to hell, that's what i'm tired of.

:rofl:  :cheers:  :rocker:  :beat:  :agree:  :dose:  :roflmao:  :roflmao:  :rasta:

[Che Gookin]

I have absolutely no idea with the govt. of China would block the Orange Pages....  :soapbox:


But this page here, perused after I proxied up, provides the laughs:

http://http://www.orange-papers.org%2Forange-pmachine7.html

Now that's quality.