Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: psy on September 02, 2010, 07:48:20 PM
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
So what you are saying is AA is a dogmatic cult like group.... :seg:
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
Why do you stay in the shadows, you brain wizard. Nice piece of info, I needed to hear it.
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
So what you are saying is AA is a dogmatic cult like group.... :seg:
Hey BP, as you know AA/NA will not recognize groups that use a members name for this very purpose but it does not mean there is not the "Danny Ryans" out there running his own AA group in Hartford CT.
-
To put these results further in perspective, I chose the ten cult attributes that I consider most important, and for those ten attributes I compared the scores of communal and institutional AA with those of the Church of Scientology, the Moonies, and Kerista Village. The attributes I consider most important are religious orientation; irrationality; dogmatism; mind control techniques; a charismatic leader; a hierarchical, authoritarian structure; submission of the individual to the will of God; economic exploitation; a closed, all-encompassing environment; and the use of violence, coercion, and/or harassment. I assigned the Moonies a score of a "perfect" 10 for these attributes and the Scientologists a score of 9 (their charismatic leader is dead), while Kerista Village came in with a score of 6, institutional AA with a score of 9, and communal AA with a score of 4.
Thus, if you consider communal AA separately from institutional AA, you're left with little choice but to conclude that AA isn't a cult—though it comes close, and does have many dangerous, cult-like tendencies. But if you regard institutional AA as an extension of communal AA and consider them as one, you're inexorably drawn to the conclusion that AA is a cult. Communal/institutional AA definitely isn't in the same league with vicious, destructive cults such as the Moonies and the People's Temple, but it does display an alarmingly high number of similarities to such groups. All in all, communal/institutional AA merits the description given to it by Stanton Peele: "Cult Lite."x
Cult Lite seems to be the more appropriate term, though not for the lack of havoc AA has wreaked on the lives of men and women caught up in their twisted ideology.
-
So what you are saying is AA is a dogmatic cult like group.... :seg:
Yes, I'd say it's a cult-like group that definitely uses thought reform. Most people, even AA supporters, will concede that. What they do is justify it, saying that it's ok because it helps people. Well. If it doesn't help people, that whole argument falls apart and thats where you need to look at the hard data. Like you've cited in the past, there is significant evidence that for most people AA is worse than no treatment at all, often causing an increase in relapses (Brandsma, et al).
That being said, there is some evidence to suggest that AA can work well with people who already believe in fatalistic powerless over alcohol and who already believe in a benevolent higher power that gives a shit about us human beings (Peele). On the other hand, it works very badly for those who believe god gave us free will, those who are atheists/agnostics, or those who do not believe in a benevolent god (Peele again).
Those who believe god cursed them or doesn't care will "let go" and "god" won't catch them. Those who believe god doesn't exist are similarly screwed. They're told to let go knowing there is nobody there to catch them. Those who believe in free will are asked to change their beliefs... asked to accept they are powerless over their own actions. Some of these people can be "converted" but not without sacrificing their core beliefs and self concepts. Such conversion doesn't last long anyway, as thought reform never does.
It's my belief that those for who whom AA "works" were always partial to compatible belief system. For them it's not so much a thought reform process as it is a re-affirmation of what they believed to begin with. The same concept is true for Atheists, agnostics, believers in free will, and so on. For such people, alternatives to AA such as SMART, RR, and SOS work very very well because it works within their existing belief systems without using thought reform. People in AA NEED to realize they are doing harm by insisting it is the program for everybody and refusing to acknowledge or recommend alternatives.
-
So what you are saying is AA is a dogmatic cult like group.... :seg:
Yes, I'd say it's a cult-like group that definitely uses thought reform. Most people, even AA supporters, will concede that. What they do is justify it, saying that it's ok because it helps people. Well. If it doesn't help people, that whole argument falls apart and thats where you need to look at the hard data. Like you've cited in the past, there is significant evidence that for most people AA is worse than no treatment at all, often causing an increase in relapses (Brandsma, et al).
That being said, there is some evidence to suggest that AA can work well with people who already believe in fatalistic powerless over alcohol and who already believe in a benevolent higher power that gives a shit about us human beings (Peele). On the other hand, it works very badly for those who believe god gave us free will, those who are atheists/agnostics, or those who do not believe in a benevolent god (Peele again).
Those who believe god cursed them or doesn't care will "let go" and "god" won't catch them. Those who believe god doesn't exist are similarly screwed. They're told to let go knowing there is nobody there to catch them. Those who believe in free will are asked to change their beliefs... asked to accept they are powerless over their own actions. Some of these people can be "converted" but not without sacrificing their core beliefs and self concepts. Such conversion doesn't last long anyway, as thought reform never does.
It's my belief that those who whom AA "works" for were always partial to compatible belief system. For them it's not so much a thought reform process as it is a re-affirmation of what they believed to begin with. The same concept is true for Atheists, agnostics, believers in free will, and so on. For such people, alternatives to AA such as SMART, RR, and SOS work very very well because it works within their existing belief systems without using thought reform. People in AA NEED to realize they are doing harm by insisting it is the program for everybody and refusing to acknowledge or recommend alternatives.
Psy, now you were doing fine until you had to run off on this tangent. All were hearing here is your past control issues and how you don't like anything that smells of control.
As I have been explaining since I have got here is most of you have really have no idea what it is your talking about. Hard evidence is difficult to come by in the traditional sense. The bulk of you folks have a hard time with anecdotal evidence which is all your going to get with AA (or opinions from folks with a ax to grind or pitching their flavor of self help).
Psy, the most important part you missed here is your literal take on AA, If I am not mistaken your still in college and rather young and you have never had a addiction to really anything. Life is still untested, keep going my friend and please don't take life so seriously.
I have noticed one other peculiar oddity, everyone refers to AA when speaking in reference to a point ( They're told ). Who is "they're"?????? Who are these strange folks, Psy, who tell us all these negative thought reform tricks?????
The beautiful part that I always cherished about AA was Bills wish that it be suggestive, yes, Bill felt convincingly that he had found something that would help the desperate alcoholic but he also was smart enough to know that he had to keep the process to sobriety open for doubt. He wanted to write a very different book, be sure of that but Dr. Bob being a doctor knew there were no guarantees when it came to medical maladies so he encouraged be to be careful not to be a "know it all" when it came to Alcoholism. (As I do concerning AA...:))
What you write about above, Psy, I have no idea sincerely where you get these thoughts. I do not believe they are yours from experience but rather from what you have read and anecdotal stories. I am fine with this, so long as you are but please don't pass your stories off as if you have done personal studies.
People as yourself can manipulate information with superb writing skills and relatively good retention levels of info, I say, "Bravo". You can not hide good common sense though, which you are not showing here. AA is not a program, clinic or T/C it is more or less a group of people who share a common goal, to stay sober. That's it.
-
Danny.
1. How many books have you read on Cults or thought reform?
2. How many books, other than the standard AA literature, have you read on alcoholism/addiction?
Ignorance supported by anecdote is not something to be proud of. I know you're not that much of a wet-brain that you can't read a book. Educate yourself a little. Read Margaret Singer's "Cults In Our Midst", Robert J. Lifton's "Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism" or anything by Steve Hassan. Read Stanton Peele's "Diseasing of America" or even just this chapter (http://http://www.peele.net/lib/diseasing3.html). Read Jeffrey A Schaler's "Addiction Is A Choice". Read "AA: Cult Or Cure" by Charles Bufe. It's even available online here in PDF format (http://http://home.earthlink.net/~bbaa.library/AA_Cult_or_Cure.pdf). Read some of these books, read some of the research, and you might come to the conclusion that I am neither stupid nor pulling my evidence for my conclusions out of my ass. Until you've fully checked out what I have to say you have no right to judge. I've read the 12 and 12 and i've visited AA meetings. I don't need to be a drunk know what goes on. An uninvested perspective is often the most accurate.
You can rant on and on about what you feel are my control issues or whatever. Sure. I do believe I am in control of my actions and are thus responsible for them. AA teaches you are not in control of your actions such as drinking (powerless over alcohol) and are thus not responsible for your actions or their foreseeable consequences. It's a disease, it's not your fault! You're absolved of all your sins! Which of the philosophies do you really think is a healthy way to live a life. I confess. That's my control "issue". I'm not an irresponsible lush.
-
:timeout:
-
If fornits were a cult, who would our leader be?
-
I read somewhere that cults aren't necessarily destructive and that some are relatively benign. Usually when I make a reference to a cult I am speaking of "destructive cults" which may use mind control techniques, et cetera.
So... not only do we have to examine if a group is a cult but we also must determine if it is destructive or damaging to its members. This is almost impossible without transparency from the group/cult.
-
Danny.
1. How many books have you read on Cults or thought reform?
Well I would love to show you, last year I finally completed the wall shelving in my den. I have cultivated a great many books over 30 years. Not all are directly concerning cults but most I have do deal with thought control.
Please do come to Canton, Ga. we call this area the "equine hiatus".
2. How many books, other than the standard AA literature, have you read on alcoholism/addiction?
Psy, I have been from Boston to Los Angeles and in between. I have sat in on seminars, symposiums, and lectures at UCLA and the Betty Ford Clinic, to The Hazelton Facilities in Minnesota and High Watch treatment facilities in CT., to Boston University and JRC.
Books I have read would rival yours and then some, probably because I am older.
Ignorance supported by anecdote is not something to be proud of. I know you're not that much of a wet-brain that you can't read a book. Educate yourself a little. Read Margaret Singer's "Cults In Our Midst", Robert J. Lifton's "Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism" or anything by Steve Hassan. Read Stanton Peele's "Diseasing of America" or even just this chapter (http://http://www.peele.net/lib/diseasing3.html). Read Jeffrey A Schaler's "Addiction Is A Choice". Read "AA: Cult Or Cure" by Charles Bufe. It's even available online here in PDF format (http://http://home.earthlink.net/~bbaa.library/AA_Cult_or_Cure.pdf). Read some of these books, read some of the research, and you might come to the conclusion that I am neither stupid nor pulling my evidence for my conclusions out of my ass. Until you've fully checked out what I have to say you have no right to judge. I've read the 12 and 12 and i've visited AA meetings. I don't need to be a drunk know what goes on. An uninvested perspective is often the most accurate.
Your definition of anecdotal needs a upgrade for its viability. My education is far superior then yours on this subject without a doubt. Thank God, I am not hamstrung by a structured education that is still under development as you are experiencing right now. I really appreciate your reading acumen but it does not always produced unequivocal results that can not be debated. Most of your authors are writing their opinions and you seem to have to problem with their anecdotal.
I can be rather crass at times but I did not mean to imply you are "stupid" or pulling evidence out of your ass. I will judge your comments/opinions on there merits and what I see as possible experience.
Last, NO!!!!!! Psy, your "uninvested" opinion does not mean squat is this conversation, especially on this, Site.
You can rant on and on about what you feel are my control issues or whatever. Sure. I do believe I am in control of my actions and are thus responsible for them. AA teaches you are not in control of your actions such as drinking (powerless over alcohol) and are thus not responsible for your actions or their foreseeable consequences. It's a disease, it's not your fault! You're absolved of all your sins! Which of the philosophies do you really think is a healthy way to live a life. I confess. That's my control "issue". I'm not an irresponsible lush.
Psy, you keep pushing this pseudo bullshit philosophy about AA, that just cracks us up. I am not just talking about folks that are members either, your regular Joe blows who truthfully understand, AA.
Program people who had unhealthy experiences all scream the same song about AA. Your not knew or original, I have been listening to someone like yourself for 20 years. I will say though Anne, 12 step reform, BP and yourself are some of the best I have heard in a while.
You really missed the boat on AA and got caught up in some hoopla here with other members. Talk about thought reform.
Where in the hell you ever got Alcohol is a "disease" I don't know, I have not heard this description in a long time, good luck with your definitions.
-
Psy I get where you are coming from with this. I admit I am not any cult expert although i did read the margaret singer book. But I would say that some AA groups in my experience are less like a cult than others for sure. I dont know if you have had addiction issues yourself, but where AA is pretty dogmatic is that anyone for whom their ideas don't work they do dismiss as morally inferior. Ive talked to Jesuit priests and salvation army guys who obviously feel pretty strongly about what they believe in and they have been able to disagree with me and not suggest that i feel the way i do because i am in some way morally inferior. This has even been after I have challenged them on pretty contentious issues like religious homophobia and mysogony. I think this is because they are probably pretty secure in what they beleive and don't need to look down on people who feel differently.
But an awful lot of AA people take this idea one step further and say if you walk away from what they believe in or question their dogma then you are pretty much doomed to the life of a hopeless junkie. Or they get irrationally angry and start demanding that you "Get honest" whih is a loaded language way of accusing you of being a liar and a fake. Moreover some AA groups advocate a really kind of obnoxious about any friends that indulge in anything. For instance most of my friends know that I am not a nightclub kind of guy any more so I am more likely to meet them for a quiet beer or a coffee. If they want to go party afterward I am not going to try and stop them or make assumptions about whether they are addicts. Ive see 12 steppers argue that I should cut myself off from such people. The same people also once very strongly advised that when I was attending a family birthday celebration I demand that the whole family refrain from drinking. If they didnt it was suggested that they were not supportive and should essentially be shunned. So from where I sit a group that can encourage you to cut off non believers as well as becoming angry at questioners and deliberately manipulating language starts to look less like a self help group and more like a cult. Even if it is a milder form of cult.
I guess it is not unlike the way some of the schools for badly behaving kids are more humane than others in terms of basic standards but this does not change the fact in my opinion that they seem to run like private jails. You can either go to a nice jail or a horrible one. if you are not allowed to leave or see the outside world it is still a jail.
-
Psy I get where you are coming from with this. I admit I am not any cult expert although i did read the margaret singer book. But I would say that some AA groups in my experience are less like a cult than others for sure. I dont know if you have had addiction issues yourself, but where AA is pretty dogmatic is that anyone for whom their ideas don't work they do dismiss as morally inferior. Ive talked to Jesuit priests and salvation army guys who obviously feel pretty strongly about what they believe in and they have been able to disagree with me and not suggest that i feel the way i do because i am in some way morally inferior. This has even been after I have challenged them on pretty contentious issues like religious homophobia and mysogony. I think this is because they are probably pretty secure in what they beleive and don't need to look down on people who feel differently.
But an awful lot of AA people take this idea one step further and say if you walk away from what they believe in or question their dogma then you are pretty much doomed to the life of a hopeless junkie. Or they get irrationally angry and start demanding that you "Get honest" whih is a loaded language way of accusing you of being a liar and a fake. Moreover some AA groups advocate a really kind of obnoxious about any friends that indulge in anything. For instance most of my friends know that I am not a nightclub kind of guy any more so I am more likely to meet them for a quiet beer or a coffee. If they want to go party afterward I am not going to try and stop them or make assumptions about whether they are addicts. Ive see 12 steppers argue that I should cut myself off from such people. The same people also once very strongly advised that when I was attending a family birthday celebration I demand that the whole family refrain from drinking. If they didnt it was suggested that they were not supportive and should essentially be shunned. So from where I sit a group that can encourage you to cut off non believers as well as becoming angry at questioners and deliberately manipulating language starts to look less like a self help group and more like a cult. Even if it is a milder form of cult.
I guess it is not unlike the way some of the schools for badly behaving kids are more humane than others in terms of basic standards but this does not change the fact in my opinion that they seem to run like private jails. You can either go to a nice jail or a horrible one. if you are not allowed to leave or see the outside world it is still a jail.
and, you got this all out of going to a few meetings, as you said.
Well fornits, take integrity and throw it out the window, as you can see anyone and everyone is a "mocking bird" here. Actually y'all sound like a bunch of magpies.
-
danny you display the kind of mentality I am talking about. I assume you are referring to my first post that indicated my early doubts from that you automatically assumed I walked away even though the same post indicates that I stuck around while these doubts grew and tried a second 12 step group for gay people only. I then left. Why do you care so much that some people from the internet may or may not like the 12 steps and give their opinion on it. I just dont get why this means so much to you.
Psy guys like Danny illustrate my point. This inability to deal with any criticism of "The faith" without dismissing and attacking someone is pretty cult like behavior wouldnt you say. Ive literally met scientologists who are more mellow.
-
danny you display the kind of mentality I am talking about. I assume you are referring to my first post that indicated my early doubts from that you automatically assumed I walked away even though the same post indicates that I stuck around while these doubts grew and tried a second 12 step group for gay people only. I then left. Why do you care so much that some people from the internet may or may not like the 12 steps and give their opinion on it. I just dont get why this means so much to you.
Psy guys like Danny illustrate my point. This inability to deal with any criticism of "The faith" without dismissing and attacking someone is pretty cult like behavior wouldnt you say. Ive literally met scientologists who are more mellow.
You know exactly what my point illustrates Non-Stepper, that you will go to any lengths to prove a point even if it means putting your sensibility on the line.
All you have proven today is your complete nonsense, stop referring to Psy, he is not going to help you.
As I told you once before your lack of actual AA hard intellectual knowledge is baffling, in all of your posts you have written about your experiences with other AA people, what they have said, how they behaved and possibly what they are thinking.
Which I personally don't have a problem with but this is not necessarily AA. AA is reading the book, practicing the 12 steps and then moving on in life. Not hanging around in meetings trying to pick up lovers, gossiping and wondering where your going out to after the meeting. If you went to AA to fraternize then that is all well and good but don't complain if your expectations were not met. It seems since you found AA unacceptable as a functional place to socialize you want to find fault, so your trying to jump on the band wagon here with your glib comments.
Stepper most of my AA eduction took place at my home and in life. I was taught to spend my time educating myself about alcoholism and drug addiction, go to counseling and learn about myself. This is what I did, most of us did exactly this.
Where you folks are getting all this other shit is anybodies guess, your reading way to much into what Bill Wilson was writing about and you have taken the Book completely out of context.
AA is not a program that you insert, it is a philosophy/a design for living, you want to do or not. Where you are getting this cult, negative mind reform is from fears "you" have created and probably reinforced talking with folks like yourself who were confused.
-
Psy I get where you are coming from with this. I admit I am not any cult expert although i did read the margaret singer book. But I would say that some AA groups in my experience are less like a cult than others for sure. I dont know if you have had addiction issues yourself
Nope. I do have the "bad habit" of smoking cigarettes, though, but when it gets to the point where it causes me more risk or pain than pleasure, i'll quit.
but where AA is pretty dogmatic is that anyone for whom their ideas don't work they do dismiss as morally inferior.
I'm not sure what would make you think I disagree. There is no question that AA can be very very cult-like, as you've pointed out.
@Danny:
You didn't answer my two questions. You didn't list any specific books at all. I don't care if you're "not hamstrung by a structured education". You're capable of reading a book.
-
Psy I get where you are coming from with this. I admit I am not any cult expert although i did read the margaret singer book. But I would say that some AA groups in my experience are less like a cult than others for sure. I dont know if you have had addiction issues yourself
Nope. I do have the "bad habit" of smoking cigarettes, though, but when it gets to the point where it causes me more risk or pain than pleasure, i'll quit.
but where AA is pretty dogmatic is that anyone for whom their ideas don't work they do dismiss as morally inferior.
I'm not sure what would make you think I disagree. There is no question that AA can be very very cult-like, as you've pointed out.
@Danny:
You didn't answer my two questions. You didn't list any specific books at all. I don't care if you're "not hamstrung by a structured education". You're capable of reading a book.
:rofl: :rofl:
Yes I am capable of reading books, I am reading two right now, "What In The World Is Going On? by Dr. David Jeremiah and The Honor Of Spies (An Honor Bound Novel) by W.E.B. Griffith and William E. Butterworth IV. I did answer your question, come down to Atlanta. I will show you my impressive collection of books I have read.
My dyslexia has a rare twist to it in regards to retaining information, so when I talk with folks about books I have read I need them in from of me, therefore, I can't right now refer to them.
I am in Tampa and Englewood on vacation. I will be in Atlanta on "Rosh Hashanah" with friends, I will make the effort to answer your question then, OK. Otherwise to mean I can not think of a book right now of significance to save my life.
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
I think there is an important consideration to make in this definition. The concept of the corporate entity AS the cult leader, and that legally obligates the organization to organize in an inverted T. The directors of a corporation, under penalty of law, are required to make decisions that will return the most money to it’s shareholders. Corporations are legally recognized as citizens and protected by the same laws as any ordinary person. Corporations will develop an identity or self image, and they have the same rights to protect it as any person, by law, from such things as slander or inaccurate portrayals. Can’t this “identity” be seen as a “charismatic character”?
Just as a topic of debate here, if it is known within a corporation, or organization, that it would best benefit from using techniques of thought reform, can’t we then assume that it in fact WILL use it under the corporations own inherent obligations? If there are no laws that protect against the use of thought reform, then the direction to use it comes directly from the corporation itself. It seems to me there is a systemic flaw in that a lack of laws in this area actually legally obligate certain organizations, such as troubled teen programs, to practice thought reform.
Doesn’t this qualify under Singers conditions as a cult?
(imo- I actually don’t like using the word cult anyway. I think it turns many people off in a serious conversation and it is stigmatized and stereotyped too much. Yet there seems to be a lack for a better word in many cases.)
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
I hear what you're saying and agree with most of it, but Scientology is a cult and their leader's dead.
-
According to Margaret Singer, a group must fit three criteria in order to be called a cult.
1. The origin of the group (the intent of the leader, where the beliefs come from, etc).
2. The use of thought reform (Liftons 8, Singer's 6, etc...)
3. The organization must be structured like an inverted "T". The charismatic leader is on top, and everybody else is on the bottom. There may be a leadership structure but ultimately all decisions are made by the great, all knowing, leader.
A group can be a "cult like group", "thought reform environment", or "compete and utter bullshit" but unless it fits all three of the above criteria, it's inaccurate to call it a "cult". AA is not a cult. It's charismatic leader is dead. It also has little organizational structure. It may be a cult like group or a thought reform environment but to apply the term to AA cheapens it (especially when there are programs out there that do fit all three).
I think there is an important consideration to make in this definition. The concept of the corporate entity AS the cult leader, and that legally obligates the organization to organize in an inverted T. The directors of a corporation, under penalty of law, are required to make decisions that will return the most money to it’s shareholders. Corporations are legally recognized as citizens and protected by the same laws as any ordinary person. Corporations will develop an identity or self image, and they have the same rights to protect it as any person, by law, from such things as slander or inaccurate portrayals. Can’t this “identity” be seen as a “charismatic character”?
Just as a topic of debate here, if it is known within a corporation, or organization, that it would best benefit from using techniques of thought reform, can’t we then assume that it in fact WILL use it under the corporations own inherent obligations? If there are no laws that protect against the use of thought reform, then the direction to use it comes directly from the corporation itself. It seems to me there is a systemic flaw in that a lack of laws in this area actually legally obligate certain organizations, such as troubled teen programs, to practice thought reform.
Doesn’t this qualify under Singers conditions as a cult?
(imo- I actually don’t like using the word cult anyway. I think it turns many people off in a serious conversation and it is stigmatized and stereotyped too much. Yet there seems to be a lack for a better word in many cases.)
Awake, let me me try a thought on you here. I believe the trouble people would have calling the TTI a cult is for several reasons, one as you said, "just the word" intimidates, second there are to many entities working within the TTI for their to be focused concentration. Examples; parents, the child, the program and The Corporation, there is the inverted "T" but it is crowded at the top.
I don't know if this made any sense just some thoughts.
I do believe programs march in a "cult like" step with their daily model of thought control.
-
Danny reinventing himself, laughable.
-
I get where you are coming from with this. I admit that I have no cult expert Margaret Singer, even though I read the book. But I would say that some AA groups in my experience are less of a cult than others for sure. I do not know if you have an addiction to things myself, but if the AA is rather dogmatic, that all those to whom their doctrines are not active refusal morally inferior.
-
I thought we were real![attachment=0:1xlt9kxk]cult 2.jpg[/attachment:1xlt9kxk]
-
Lol. At Hyde, it is yellow t-shirts instead of the orange robes... :D
At least, such was the case in 2009... From the Only @ Hyde (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=26127), HAPA -- an LGAT (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=24677) and On Being a Hyde Parent (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=27197) threads, respectively:
- Originally posted (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=26127&p=325978#p326029) on 13 Feb 2009:
Here's a YouTube clip that includes the material within that Google clip Joe posted above, plus extra before and after material.
Only At Hyde
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXvwT2Fbhlc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXvwT2Fbhlc)
Hyde School visits Today Show to promote new website.
Jeez Louise... add the tiniest bit of red tint to all those yellow shirts, and you get...orange. Hare Krishna, Hare potential, Hare char-ac-ter...[/quote]
I was thinking "Moonies" when I saw the video.[/quote][/li][/list]
- Originally posted (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=24677&p=328362#p328362) on 21 Mar 2009:
Songwriters' Workshop headed by Don Cook and Michael McDonald
"What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away."
Tell the truth, who's been foolin' you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7vImjEQDVc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7vImjEQDVc)
From Alumni News, Spring/Summer 2008:
2007
. . .
Dylan McDonald and his band, the Avians, opened for his father, Grammy Award winner Michael McDonald, at the Bank of America Pavilion Theater in Boston in September. Dylan appeared on stage wearing a bright yellow HYDE t-shirt in front of thousands of fans! His band performed an opening set while the big screens flashed our name (and his face) over and over again.
. . .
http://www.hyde.edu/ftpimages/107/downl ... 328339.pdf (http://www.hyde.edu/ftpimages/107/download/download_group9314_id328339.pdf)
- Originally posted (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=27197&p=328800#p328800) on 27 Mar 2009:
It is not uncommon for Hyde families to keep the school shield and the Five Principles posted on the refrigerator door in the family kitchen.
:rofl: make sure you get one of those yellow t-shirts to wear when you scream out "go hyde" at public gatherings
-
Actually, the seed t shirts were white with dark green lettering. And the licence plates were the same color as the t shirt in the pic.
-
And by the way Ursus,none of the links in your last post work anymore.
-
cult,schmult says I........ :rofl:
LETS HAVE A SONG!!!!!!
If your a cult and you know it,clap yer hands(c'mon sing along!)
If your a cult and you know it ,clap yer hands
If your a cult and you know it, then my cock you gotta blow it
If your a cult and you know it,clap yer hands.
This has been a public service announcement......with guitars.....
brought to you by the Seamus Republican Army, and sponsered, in part by Guinness stout.
Go Figure :roflmao:
-
What a post....he makes fun of,or reference to: the overuse of cult, a straight song(with parody included,at no extra charge) The IRA , The Clash......himself AND his own drinking problem.....all in one swipe......and its 8.20 am...wheeeee