Penn & Teller Bullshit Episode: 12 Step Programs

[Anonymous]

In any case I deeply dislike labels such as “cult, “survivor,” “programmie” -- and for that matter, “fascist,” “communist,” etc. Quite apart from their anti-analytical, inflammatory purpose, such terms have lost most of their meaning through overuse. In my experience “X is a programmie!” really means, more often than not, something like “I disagree with Mr. X about Y.”

yes these terms have lost their meaning through misuse..particularly cult. i'd say people should educate themselves about cultic organizations, but I'd come off like such a condescending twit that I refrain. Not to mention a lot of people cannot be "educated."

 :bs:   :bs:   :bs:   :bs:

go on ... pick at semantics ... anything to avoid having to ...
face the TRUTH!!

Semantics are important to a certain extent because language is the tool we use to convey ideas. These aren't schools that abduct kids, they are privately funded thought reform captivity centers and cult like. AA and fornits and less popular religions, without further demarcation,  cannot be called cults or cult like. If you are going to say "aa" or unpopular religions or fornits is a cult, recognize that you are spreading misinformation and making it harder for cultic victims to receive recompense, in a small way.

Straight and the Synanon derivative thought reform prisons are certainly within the cultic spectrum. NO one would disagree with you on that who know what they're talking about. Ignore the trolls who suggest otherwise, or engage them if you like arguing, with the recognition you're dealing with a brainwashed lost soul, or worse.

[psy]

Well.  Many programs have bona-fide charismatic leaders that the kids (and sometime parents) would do anything for (breaking the law, etc...) placing those programs firmly within the "cult" zone, and not just cult-like.

[Anonymous]

Well.  Many programs have bona-fide charismatic leaders that the kids (and sometime parents) would do anything for (breaking the law, etc...) placing those programs firmly within the "cult" zone, and not just cult-like.

One thing i am not sure about: Do the upper level warden/torturer KNOW what they are doing is evil? Do monsters like Micheal Desisto or Mel Wasserman (sp?)
THINK they are helping people? My feeling is that they know what they are doing to people, and simply dont care. But are staff like Steve Larid or Rudy Bentz who came on and then started their own torture centers brainwashed? Do they know real from unreal anymore?

[psy]

Well.  Many programs have bona-fide charismatic leaders that the kids (and sometime parents) would do anything for (breaking the law, etc...) placing those programs firmly within the "cult" zone, and not just cult-like.

One thing i am not sure about: Do the upper level warden/torturer KNOW what they are doing is evil? Do monsters like Micheal Desisto or Mel Wasserman (sp?)
THINK they are helping people? My feeling is that they know what they are doing to people, and simply dont care. But are staff like Steve Larid or Rudy Bentz who came on and then started their own torture centers brainwashed? Do they know real from unreal anymore?

Those are good questions i'm not sure anybody can answer.  I've thought about those questions a lot.   Who knows.

[FemanonFatal2.0]

In any case I deeply dislike labels such as “cult, “survivor,” “programmie” -- and for that matter, “fascist,” “communist,” etc. Quite apart from their anti-analytical, inflammatory purpose, such terms have lost most of their meaning through overuse. In my experience “X is a programmie!” really means, more often than not, something like “I disagree with Mr. X about Y.”

yes these terms have lost their meaning through misuse..particularly cult. i'd say people should educate themselves about cultic organizations, but I'd come off like such a condescending twit that I refrain. Not to mention a lot of people cannot be "educated."

Funny, my post was not about cults... however is the language I used the only response you have to the question I posed? Ill pose said question again.

How is a religion any different than a cult? a widely accepted cult but a cult none the less. Especially when branches of said cults are created to "fix" people, like AA.

My post is about the fairytale stories that are told (especially in the bible) and why do adults choose to believe them, furthermore what does religion have to do with recovery from an addiction? Cult or not, AA's concepts are off the wall and this episode of Pen and Teller's "Bullshit" should have put that into perspective. For one the disease concept, which is completely void of having any scientific basis and then going as far as to say that the only cure to said disease is converting to the 12 step religion....? psssssht. As much as it isn't marketed as a religion, the fact that the main requirement is to accept a god and offer your life to them is a bit telling. Futhermore how counter-productive is it to admit you are helpless?... especially when managing an addiction requires willpower?... that just really makes no sense. Unless of course, the main intention of this tactic is to ensure dependence on the religion or said group.

Although I didn't get into that argument, as it has been covered here before, what I said was how is it possible that we as a society are so willing to openly accept these outlandish concepts. Those perpetrated by religions, and their separate sects and especially those who are intended to convert members of our society into a blind obedience. What for? I don't know, but what I do know is that any logical person who was not brought up around the same religious beliefs would find them absurd and I find it surprising that these ideals would be used as some form of treatment for people with addiction. Why are we as a society willing to so widely accept these concepts without questioning the legitimacy of their practices and why is it considered rebellious to be wary of what we are instructed to believe?

Having faith, and believing in a higher power are something completely different than perusing a religion. Religious sects have been corrupt since the dawn of their conception, but the question is what is really the purpose of creating a group of followers to any organization or belief system? To control the masses. and if the masses are controllable, they are usable and when a whole society can be used and abused what do you get?

well exactly what we've got.

lol.

[psy]

How is a religion any different than a cult? a widely accepted cult but a cult none the less.

A couple things

1. religions don't deceptively recruit.  people know what they're getting into
2. religions don't have secret practices.
3. religions don't require you to give money, though many recieve donations, or even suggest it.  The bible says 10% but nobody does that and nobody is enforcing it.  Nobody knows what you put in the collections plate except yourself.
4. religions don't sue people or kill your pets if you piss them off.
5. religions don't practice thought reform (in the lifton sense).  What they do on the continuum of influence and persuasion is called "indoctrination".

I could go on and on and on.

Yes there are religious cults, but there are all sorts of other cults as well.  "Cult" means three things: origin of the group, structure of the group, and use of thought reform.  This can apply to any type of organization.  "god" can be substituted for any type of absolute truth/salvation supposedly only available through the group.

[Ursus]

MMmmm... I try to hold up my 'coercion ruler' and see where said organization lines up. It's not an exact science. And what something says it is...is not necessary what it actually is, in my book, at least.

SOME churches can be pretty damn coercive, if you ask me. E.g., Assemblies of God and their affiliates, Dominionist churches in general, a far share of the Pentacostals, even select branches of the Catholic Church fail my 'coercion ruler'.

The Boston Church of Christ (as opposed to other branches of CoC) was even investigated a number of years ago for "coercion." The Church brought in some Investigator from the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator people to prove the naysayers and malcontents wrong. Well over a thousand people undertook self-assessments (there were quite a number of control groups included as well), and it was found that people definitely were pressured into and underwent personality changes (conclusion: coercion). Worst hit were those who were originally introverted by nature.

And hey, let's not forget what goes on in other parts of the world in the name of "saving the children" (by driving nails into their skulls to chase out witches), or a given culture's virtue (by extorting suicide bombers out of families that need to pay a price), not to mention the myriad other insults and assaults that are enacted in the name of "The Holy" too numerous and too depressing to go into here.

So...I am highly suspicious of many religions, even though "religion" per se does not necessarily spell out "cult" to me... yet. I am open to having my definition broadened.

 ::evil::

[psy]

It's not an exact science.

This is very true!

[psy]

select branches of the Catholic Church fail my 'coercion ruler'.

Regnum Christi / Legionnaires of Christ would be a good example in the Catholic Church.  Rick Ross has them in his DB.  The thing is with that story was that it was sort of like a "rogue" sect.  The pope didn't know what was fully going on and when he found out, took steps to remove the leader (Marcel Marciel) from his post.  Marcel had secret vows and all sorts of things (not to mention lots and lots of little boys).  Since then, the sect is (supposedly) relatively benign (cut the head off...).

[Anonymous]

Blah,Blah.Blah... nobody cares.

[Ursus]

select branches of the Catholic Church fail my 'coercion ruler'.

Regnum Christi / Legionnaires of Christ would be a good example in the Catholic Church.  Rick Ross has them in his DB.  The thing is with that story was that it was sort of like a "rogue" sect.  The pope didn't know what was fully going on and when he found out, took steps to remove the leader (Marcel Marciel) from his post.  Marcel had secret vows and all sorts of things (not to mention lots and lots of little boys).  Since then, the sect is (supposedly) relatively benign (cut the head off...).

Ah, jeez... That friggin' debauched despot was definitely in the forefront of my mind when I wrote that. But know this: it took DECADES and at least two popes to get that reamer cordoned off to the sidelines; and even then, the Church never fully acknowledged or sanctioned him for his crimes. They knew -- but did not want to admit -- what was going on with him and his secret little society. By the end, it was "more than 20, but less than a hundred" who dared come forth and put their names on the list. Who knows how many many more could not bring themselves to take that step.

Way back, in the very beginning, Marcel Marciel was kicked out of two orders for reasons unknown. He was finally able to become a priest because his uncle ordained him. How many decades of other people's misery was he able to exact out of his position? Was it five? Or six? You know he used to have his boy toys buy opiates for him. He was a complete lush, through and through.

When his victims told him that they felt bad about the sexual aspect of his "mentorship" and that they wanted to confess to a priest, he would "hear" their confessions and grant them absolution. And then continue fucking them.

He had yet another double life: a mistress, with whom he allegedly fathered a child. The daughter is now supposedly in her early twenties.

[psy]

I have.....  er... family.... that are members.  intimately.

that's how I know bout em.

[FemanonFatal2.0]

How is a religion any different than a cult? a widely accepted cult but a cult none the less.

A couple things

1. religions don't deceptively recruit.  people know what they're getting into
2. religions don't have secret practices.
3. religions don't require you to give money, though many recieve donations, or even suggest it.  The bible says 10% but nobody does that and nobody is enforcing it.  Nobody knows what you put in the collections plate except yourself.
4. religions don't sue people or kill your pets if you piss them off.
5. religions don't practice thought reform (in the lifton sense).  What they do on the continuum of influence and persuasion is called "indoctrination".

I could go on and on and on.

Yes there are religious cults, but there are all sorts of other cults as well.  "Cult" means three things: origin of the group, structure of the group, and use of thought reform.  This can apply to any type of organization.  "god" can be substituted for any type of absolute truth/salvation supposedly only available through the group.

Great answer!

However I have a broader opinion of what "thought reform" really is. I think that religions such as Mormonism, Catholicism, Islam and some extremist Christian sects do in fact use thought reform and tactics of social isolation including secret practices. In fact most of these things you listed above apply in most ways to any organization (except of course killing pets) that is intent on recruiting people into a radical belief system. Just as you have said recently, the mere fact that people go into the duck farm non believers and come out singing praises is evidence enough that there is some kind of brainwashing going on. The only reason you think that religions don't "deceptively recruit" is because to your knowledge they aren't pulling a marketing strategy like the BM programs do. But what you don't realize is that this "deceptive recruiting" isn't marketed to logical adults, the targeted audience is the children. They read the children these moralistic fairy tales and just like Santa Claus they believe its true and they grow up continuing to believe them. However, the silent thought reform is peer pressure, (the same tactics they utilized in the program) because these beliefs are so widely accepted these children grow to accept what they were told, and what is constantly re-enforced by their parents, in church, in the media and even by our pledge of allegiance, must be true. Also consider that most people are cast out of their peer group or even their families if they dare to question these beliefs. Looking at the big picture, and society as a whole you will notice that the thought reform has become a part of our culture.

Regardless, I don't think these things listed above are what really separate a religion from a cult... and I agree, the word's meaning must have been lost along the way. In my opinion a cult is neither evil nor divine, I think the mere fact that an organization that harbors a purpose to convert people (usually the lost and struggling) into an illogical belief system in order to create a separation between them and the rest of the world can constitute as a cult. I personally believe that all religions started out as small cults and as their crusades yielded more and more believers the less and less they needed to practice thought reform techniques. Instead that thought reform got watered down by the acceptance of a society until no longer does thought reform seem to be thought reform, and conversions become automatic, especially when growing up in a religious home.

Like I've said before, these are my personal beliefs. I guess I have always questioned authority, including the way that people think and how we came to create our society as it is today. But my original point remains. I find it ridiculous that people continue to take religion so seriously and accept outlandish beliefs so easily. Faith and religion are two different things... and I don't think religion has any place in substance abuse recovery.

[try another castle]

psy, bloody brilliant link! Thanks!

The whole idea of creating and using a state-sanctioned religious entity, which is held up to no regulation nor required to produce numbers or evidence of success, as a method for coercing willing or unwilling citizens to quit a habit that is an individual liberty, nobody's business to begin with, and as such, a private decision and process SHOULD one decide to quit...

...is as effective as trying to pound a flounder into a sheet of titanium with spaghetti.


BUT, if I were pressed to find a one-word term for 12 step, it would probably be cuntult. (cunty cult)

If you say it repeatedly it kind of sounds like some old, antiquated engine trying to turn itself over.

[Anonymous]

How is a religion any different than a cult? a widely accepted cult but a cult none the less.

A couple things

1. religions don't deceptively recruit.  people know what they're getting into
2. religions don't have secret practices.
3. religions don't require you to give money, though many recieve donations, or even suggest it.  The bible says 10% but nobody does that and nobody is enforcing it.  Nobody knows what you put in the collections plate except yourself.
4. religions don't sue people or kill your pets if you piss them off.
5. religions don't practice thought reform (in the lifton sense).  What they do on the continuum of influence and persuasion is called "indoctrination".

I could go on and on and on.

Yes there are religious cults, but there are all sorts of other cults as well.  "Cult" means three things: origin of the group, structure of the group, and use of thought reform.  This can apply to any type of organization.  "god" can be substituted for any type of absolute truth/salvation supposedly only available through the group.

I don't think thats quite right. If people want to understand cults they can read any of a dozen books on the subject the most famous being "cults in our midst" my margeret singer.