To answer your first question - are there healthy cults - yes…that’s why I started adding the adjectives “ harmful and controlling “ to unhealthy cults.
to answer your second question - what is a cult - see Wikipedia reference below:
Yeah, aware of the wikepedia info.
So, attempting to refine the question.
I mean everyone in The Way is smiling. Not harmful.
Everyone freely avails themselves. Not controlling. (oldiesm@n's argument)
Yeah, aware of the wikepedia info. So, attempting to refine the question.
I mean everyone in The Way is smiling. Not harmful.
Everyone freely avails themselves. Not controlling. (oldiesm@n's argument)
We'd have to define harm and control?
Perhaps we’re not on the same page…I don’t think it’s a matter of defining what is harmful and controlling, since that has been done already – most notably by the very link to the article that you provided early – and which I quoted from recently – here:
19 hours ago, T-Bone said:
Hi Bolshevik,
You always have some interesting ideas and links…and it usually takes me doing some extra-credit work ( wonder if my credit is any good here ) in remedial reading to understand what you’re talking about…thanks for that link – I browsed through the paper and quoted some interesting points further down in this post, that mainly get into the methods of a cult versus those used by “legitimate political, social, and religious groups/movements” …but after reading it I realized I needed to understand “object relations perspective” so I Googled that and found this:
“Object relations is a variation of psychoanalytic theory that diverges from Sigmund Freud’s belief that humans are motivated by sexual and aggressive drives, suggesting instead that humans are primarily motivated by the need for contact with others—the need to form relationships.
The aim of an object relations therapist is to help an individual in therapy uncover early mental images that may contribute to any present difficulties in one’s relationships with others and adjust them in ways that may improve interpersonal functioning.
BASIC CONCEPTS IN OBJECT RELATIONS
In the context of object relations theory, the term "objects" refers not to inanimate entities but to significant others with whom an individual relates, usually one's mother, father, or primary caregiver. In some cases, the term object may also be used to refer to a part of a person, such as a mother's breast, or to the mental representations of significant others.”
From: Good Therapy.org
Now back to the “An Object Relations Approach to Cult Membership” paper from your link…and putting this stuff together with what I found elsewhere - it’s a fiendish process how harmful and controlling cults tap into unconscious social needs that motivate and influence the cult member’s behavior.
From the Abstract "A distinction based on two sets of dynamics should be drawn between legitimate political, social, and religious groups/movements and cults. The first is the ‘methods cults use (as opposed to those used by more benign groups), the second is the disparity in outcomes between the two sets of groups. Concerning the first distinction, the following are frequently reported occurrences in what are referred as cults (Almendros et al., 2007; Goldberg, 1997; Langone, 1996; Shaw, 2003, Young & Griffith, 1992; Zimbardo, 1997), coercion, intimidation, threats, physical and verbal abuse, manipulation, dishonesty (by leadership), sexual bullying, isolation and separation from friends and family, and forfeiture of personal finances.
Whereas those conditions certainly exist in legitimate organizations (Young & Griffith, 1997), they are often the exception rather than the rule. Concerning the second point: no legitimate religion, political movement—or any group for that matter—has a 100% retention rate, much less a 100% success rate in whatever areas of personal or social functioning that they purport to improve. However, with cults, the member is, more often than not, left in a much worse position than in which he started, whether it t be financially, psychologically, relationally, or some combination of these and other factors (Langone, 1996; Morse & Morse, 1987; Robinson, Frye, & Bradley, 1997).
The question, from a social-psychological perspective, of how an individual is drawn into and eventually controlled by a cult becomes one of established research. The power of social influence on conformity, as well as the power of an authority figure to induce compliance, have both been made abundantly clear and certainly play an integral role in cult integration. However, this perspective does not address the more internal dynamics that are activated through the cult experience, to which we attempt to speak. It has been observed that those who join cults do not appear to suffer significantly higher instances of psychological illness before entering the cult environment than the general population.
As Langone (1996) stated, “No particular psychopathology profile is associated with cult involvement, in part because cults, like many effective sales organizations, adjust their pitch to the personality and needs of their prospects” (p. 2). The acknowledgement that cult members are not qualitatively different from the general population in any specific area of adjustment or psychological functioning is an essential component of the current authors’ proposed theory. It is worth mentioning, however, that several authors have found that there are some developmental and relational factors that may make some individuals more susceptible to cult recruitment (Buxtant, Saroglou, Casalfiore, & Christians, 2007; Buxtant & Saroglou, 2008; Robinson, Frye, & Bradley, 1997).
The authors propose that many of the experiences of the cult member serve to weaken normal ego functioning through methods which induce dissociation (Ash, 1985; Goldberg, 1997; Morse & Morse, 1987), compromise critical thinking and volition (Goldberg, 1997; Morse & Morse, 1987; Robinson et al., 1997; Young & Griffith, 1992; Zimbardo, 1997), and impose tremendous social pressure to conform and comply (Hassan, 1988; Langone, 1996; Zimbardo, 1997). These experiences lead to the activation of a primitive level of object relationships and defensive operations that Otto Kernberg linked specifically to the borderline level of personality organization (Kernberg, 1976; Kernberg, 1984).
And from page 4:
“OBJECT RELATIONS THEORY AND ITS ROLE IN THE CULT EXPERIENCE
The role of object relations in the cult experience may only be a topic of conjecture but the authors propose, as have others, that the cult experience taps into unconscious attachment needs that motivate and direct the cult member’s behavior. As stated earlier, an intense process of dissociating and manipulating experiences set the stage for an ego regression.
This externally induced ego regression activates early attachment needs, a primitive level of object relationships and object representations, and corresponding engagements in primitive defensive operations. It is the emergence of these defensive operations that indicate the cult member is indeed operating, if only temporarily, at the borderline range of personality organization.”
From: Psychiatry Online
Ok – sorry for the long post – so just to reiterate my point here ‘tis again: Harmful and controlling cults use subliminally nefarious methods to access the deep unconscious social needs that motivate and influence the cult member’s behavior.
Sorry if I’m too dense to get what you’re trying to say…maybe I’m confused and need clarification - but I didn’t think you wanted to quibble over superficial impressions like “but everyone in TWI is smiling”…..soooooooooo
Did you want to elaborate on what is harmful and controlling?
Perhaps we’re not on the same page…I don’t think it’s a matter of defining what is harmful and controlling, since that has been done already – most notably by the very link to the article that you provided early – and which I quoted from recently – here:
Sorry if I’m too dense to get what you’re trying to say…maybe I’m confused and need clarification - but I didn’t think you wanted to quibble over superficial impressions like “but everyone in TWI is smiling”…..soooooooooo
Did you want to elaborate on what is harmful and controlling?
Right T-Bone . . . I quoted the article . . . All I'm seeing is describing symptoms of a cult ( the bad kind) . . . but nothing really says what it is.
Edited by Bolshevik words with no meaning and stuff
And obviously in the um, cult we are usually referring to, what does that mean?
It means - that after everything that was said - and I know I’m verbose - I love the way you summed it all up - nothing more was needed to be said…I was complimenting your conciseness.
…you’re welcome!
Edited by T-Bone Boxer or briefs? Professional pugilist or lawyer ?
It means - that after everything that was said - and I know I’m verbose - I love the way you summed it all up - nothing more was needed to be said…I was complimenting your conciseness.
ok sorry
I am hopeful something, like using object relations models, could connect all the descriptions one day.
I am hopeful something, like using object relations models, could connect all the descriptions one day.
That’s why a few posts ago I asked if you wanted to elaborate on harmful and controlling cults…that’s what all this back and forth and clarifying and “did you mean…?” and summing up is all about…we’re elaborating - getting into more details and tying things together.
That’s why a few posts ago I asked if you wanted to elaborate on harmful and controlling cults…that’s what all this back and forth and clarifying and “did you mean…?” and summing up is all about…we’re elaborating - getting into more details and tying things together.
I don't know if you saw the other link above, a video where Vaknin discusses how some people (cluster Bs) relate to others. There's interesting dynamics there. You can get some definition of what a healthy relationship is and the various ways it can go wrong . . . or fundamentally, foundationally, be "bad". That's psychology. I'm saying here that good and bad results from the cult experience are due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
The cult leader is supposed to be the central theme, the main antagonist, the worst offender. But he can't act alone. Cut them off from others and what can they do? Here I'm saying the leader is a cluster B . . . and is able to induce an environment creating other cluster B . . . and the dynamics of how cluster Bs interact on a grander scale.
A cult, is more the one or two people. It's made of people. You were hopeful by changing out the people the cult would change. That's sociology. Or it's an organizational structure . . . but people are relating more openly than in a normal organization.
So it's not simply people, it's the connections between them?
I don't know if you saw the other link above, a video where Vaknin discusses how some people (cluster Bs) relate to others. There's interesting dynamics there. You can get some definition of what a healthy relationship is and the various ways it can go wrong . . . or fundamentally, foundationally, be "bad". That's psychology. I'm saying here that good and bad results from the cult experience are due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
The cult leader is supposed to be the central theme, the main antagonist, the worst offender. But he can't act alone. Cut them off from others and what can they do? Here I'm saying the leader is a cluster B . . . and is able to induce an environment creating other cluster B . . . and the dynamics of how cluster Bs interact on a grander scale.
A cult, is more the one or two people. It's made of people. You were hopeful by changing out the people the cult would change. That's sociology. Or it's an organizational structure . . . but people are relating more openly than in a normal organization.
So it's not simply people, it's the connections between them?
Stopping here for now.
Yes - I did check out the Vaknin video on You Tube – thanks for that – I always find him interesting!
I’ll respond to your other points by repeating them to you in my own words to see if I got your message correctly
I’m with you on the good or bad cult experiences are often due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
In a cult of personality – everything does revolve around that leader. As your diagram in the first post indicates – it takes others to reenforce the harmful and controlling tactics….as a side note I will also say that there can be a harmful and controlling cult WITHOUT a cult leader – as I’ve mentioned on another thread, can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?
A harmful and controlling cult is made up of people obviously – but I don’t see the big difference between a cult of personality and a cult of organization – IF both groups use a lot of the same contrived interpersonal skills and similar manipulative dynamics in relationships like what’s described in that article “An Object Relations Approach to Cult Membership” from your link. Pardon me for self-referencing again but that was one of the main points in my thread "can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?"
Yes - I did check out the Vaknin video on You Tube – thanks for that – I always find him interesting!
I’ll respond to your other points by repeating them to you in my own words to see if I got your message correctly
I’m with you on the good or bad cult experiences are often due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
In a cult of personality – everything does revolve around that leader. As your diagram in the first post indicates – it takes others to reenforce the harmful and controlling tactics….as a side note I will also say that there can be a harmful and controlling cult WITHOUT a cult leader – as I’ve mentioned on another thread, can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?
A harmful and controlling cult is made up of people obviously – but I don’t see the big difference between a cult of personality and a cult of organization – IF both groups use a lot of the same contrived interpersonal skills and similar manipulative dynamics in relationships like what’s described in that article “An Object Relations Approach to Cult Membership” from your link. Pardon me for self-referencing again but that was one of the main points in my thread "can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?"
Use of the words tactics and contrived. . . . Would imply some in the group are aware of what they are doing?
Yes - I did check out the Vaknin video on You Tube – thanks for that – I always find him interesting!
I’ll respond to your other points by repeating them to you in my own words to see if I got your message correctly
I’m with you on the good or bad cult experiences are often due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
In a cult of personality – everything does revolve around that leader. As your diagram in the first post indicates – it takes others to reenforce the harmful and controlling tactics….as a side note I will also say that there can be a harmful and controlling cult WITHOUT a cult leader – as I’ve mentioned on another thread, can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?
A harmful and controlling cult is made up of people obviously – but I don’t see the big difference between a cult of personality and a cult of organization – IF both groups use a lot of the same contrived interpersonal skills and similar manipulative dynamics in relationships like what’s described in that article “An Object Relations Approach to Cult Membership” from your link. Pardon me for self-referencing again but that was one of the main points in my thread "can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?"
Hey T-Bone,
I'm viewing "bad cult" followers and leaders as having a disease. A literal psychological disease . . . a more permanent disease like NPD/BPD in some and a more curable one as in the induced borderline features in the article. (borderlines live on the border of neurosis and psychosis . . . that's just an excuse to say that )
I hear you saying not all cults have a leader. But there is a motivation for starting a cult? VPW needed narcissistic supply, because of the sickness, it's what he NEEDED, like an addiction . . . unless he was cured.
Folks also join cults because of the promise of short cuts in life, easy street. Other reasons too, but those are secondary. So the group is providing the follower with something, that is unhealthy, like a drug.
Use of the words tactics and contrived. . . . Would imply some in the group are aware of what they are doing?
I would think so…and to some degree most people may have had an inkling of these social dynamics - depending on one’s life experiences thus far – for example the peer pressure and herd mentality from being in high school, clubs, social groups, etc. …speaking just from my own TWI-experience, at the time – I thought it was normal – I thought this is how real Christian believers interact with one another and as a group. The operative word is “real” in that sentence. It took me quite a few years after I left and coming to Grease Spot to realize the social dynamics of TWI is some next-level $hit ! …and truth be told, wierwille defined what was “real”.
Think about it…wierwille’s frequent reminders that feelings come and go …constant warnings to not go by your five senses and often disparaging worldly logic (which is reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity – wierwille pushed that we should reason from the principles of “The Word” – which conveniently for him always seemed to serve his best interest).
I believe what wierwille taught us was the ideal believer – the real you – but it was actually more along the lines of “The Stepford Wives” mentioned in Rocky’s post. I really think wierwille saw the ideal believer as a servile, compliant, submissive, spineless person endowed with an almost robot-like ability to suppress emotions, ignore sensory input, and turn off logical subroutines…all the while happily doing the man of God’s bidding and serving his every whim dutifully.
The weird social dynamics of TWI wages a continuous silent war on one’s personhood – and one of the major casualties of these attacks is a type of identity crisis. When I was in, I found I would often question myself – wondering if I could trust my own thinking process…at times wondering who I was and if I fit in…
Self-awareness is a conscious knowledge of our own character, true feelings, motives and desires. However, this may be difficult to perceive through that translucent overlay of TWI’s social identity “bestowed” on followers. It’s like wearing frosted glasses and looking at your own reflection in the mirror…details are diffused …individual features are not clear…this gets into a subject I find fascinating – the authentic-self versus the adaptive-self.
We are social creatures and have a natural desire to fit in. But all too often the social dynamics of a group like TWI causes discomfort, pain, fear, sadness, frustration and even anger and resentment deep down inside….
So to survive in the group and to insulate our authentic-self from further harm, we adapt somehow – we bury those things that are contrary to group-think and put on our ministry-face. Thus, our adaptive-self enables us to get along in a challenging social environment like TWI with some “success” and with the least amount of conflict with others – but often at the expense of our authentic-self going into hibernation... The longer one stays involved with TWI the more one’s authentic-self gets buried under TWI’s values, goals, priorities, contrived interpersonal skills, beliefs, behaviors - all of which serves TWI more than one’s own best interest.
To end my post on an upbeat and hopeful note, I would like to say that the real you – your authentic-self - and not some cult’s homogenized version of you, requires self-awareness and self-acceptance…self-examination is perhaps a life-long process…from time to time we may have to take stock of our beliefs and behaviors and change what doesn’t serve our best interests…that’s all for now…have a wonderful day Grease Spotters!
I'm viewing "bad cult" followers and leaders as having a disease. A literal psychological disease . . . a more permanent disease like NPD/BPD in some and a more curable one as in the induced borderline features in the article. (borderlines live on the border of neurosis and psychosis . . . that's just an excuse to say that )
I hear you saying not all cults have a leader. But there is a motivation for starting a cult? VPW needed narcissistic supply, because of the sickness, it's what he NEEDED, like an addiction . . . unless he was cured.
Folks also join cults because of the promise of short cuts in life, easy street. Other reasons too, but those are secondary. So the group is providing the follower with something, that is unhealthy, like a drug.
Recommended Posts
Bolshevik
Yeah, aware of the wikepedia info.
So, attempting to refine the question.
I mean everyone in The Way is smiling. Not harmful.
Everyone freely avails themselves. Not controlling. (oldiesm@n's argument)
We'd have to define harm and control?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Perhaps we’re not on the same page…I don’t think it’s a matter of defining what is harmful and controlling, since that has been done already – most notably by the very link to the article that you provided early – and which I quoted from recently – here:
Sorry if I’m too dense to get what you’re trying to say…maybe I’m confused and need clarification - but I didn’t think you wanted to quibble over superficial impressions like “but everyone in TWI is smiling”…..soooooooooo
Edited by T-BoneDid you want to elaborate on what is harmful and controlling?
typos and formatting
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Right T-Bone . . . I quoted the article . . . All I'm seeing is describing symptoms of a cult ( the bad kind) . . . but nothing really says what it is.
Edited by Bolshevikwords with no meaning and stuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Bad cults are bad because they are bad. Bad cults do bad things. Bad things are bad.
Is that a definition?
The article was to see if there is something deeper. More specific.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
You had me at “Bad” !
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
And obviously in the um, cult we are usually referring to, what does that mean?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
It means - that after everything that was said - and I know I’m verbose - I love the way you summed it all up - nothing more was needed to be said…I was complimenting your conciseness.
…you’re welcome!
Edited by T-BoneBoxer or briefs? Professional pugilist or lawyer ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
ok sorry
I am hopeful something, like using object relations models, could connect all the descriptions one day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
That’s why a few posts ago I asked if you wanted to elaborate on harmful and controlling cults…that’s what all this back and forth and clarifying and “did you mean…?” and summing up is all about…we’re elaborating - getting into more details and tying things together.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I don't know if you saw the other link above, a video where Vaknin discusses how some people (cluster Bs) relate to others. There's interesting dynamics there. You can get some definition of what a healthy relationship is and the various ways it can go wrong . . . or fundamentally, foundationally, be "bad". That's psychology. I'm saying here that good and bad results from the cult experience are due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
The cult leader is supposed to be the central theme, the main antagonist, the worst offender. But he can't act alone. Cut them off from others and what can they do? Here I'm saying the leader is a cluster B . . . and is able to induce an environment creating other cluster B . . . and the dynamics of how cluster Bs interact on a grander scale.
A cult, is more the one or two people. It's made of people. You were hopeful by changing out the people the cult would change. That's sociology. Or it's an organizational structure . . . but people are relating more openly than in a normal organization.
So it's not simply people, it's the connections between them?
Stopping here for now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Yes - I did check out the Vaknin video on You Tube – thanks for that – I always find him interesting!
I’ll respond to your other points by repeating them to you in my own words to see if I got your message correctly
I’m with you on the good or bad cult experiences are often due to healthy or unhealthy relationships.
In a cult of personality – everything does revolve around that leader. As your diagram in the first post indicates – it takes others to reenforce the harmful and controlling tactics….as a side note I will also say that there can be a harmful and controlling cult WITHOUT a cult leader – as I’ve mentioned on another thread, can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?
Edited by T-BoneA harmful and controlling cult is made up of people obviously – but I don’t see the big difference between a cult of personality and a cult of organization – IF both groups use a lot of the same contrived interpersonal skills and similar manipulative dynamics in relationships like what’s described in that article “An Object Relations Approach to Cult Membership” from your link. Pardon me for self-referencing again but that was one of the main points in my thread "can a cult make a transition into something less harmful and controlling?"
typos and formatting
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
The characters in Stepford Wives were pretty much always smiling too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Correct
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Use of the words tactics and contrived. . . . Would imply some in the group are aware of what they are doing?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Hey T-Bone,
I'm viewing "bad cult" followers and leaders as having a disease. A literal psychological disease . . . a more permanent disease like NPD/BPD in some and a more curable one as in the induced borderline features in the article. (borderlines live on the border of neurosis and psychosis . . . that's just an excuse to say that
)
I hear you saying not all cults have a leader. But there is a motivation for starting a cult? VPW needed narcissistic supply, because of the sickness, it's what he NEEDED, like an addiction . . . unless he was cured.
Folks also join cults because of the promise of short cuts in life, easy street. Other reasons too, but those are secondary. So the group is providing the follower with something, that is unhealthy, like a drug.
I do think we have some overlap of understanding.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
I would think so…and to some degree most people may have had an inkling of these social dynamics - depending on one’s life experiences thus far – for example the peer pressure and herd mentality from being in high school, clubs, social groups, etc. …speaking just from my own TWI-experience, at the time – I thought it was normal – I thought this is how real Christian believers interact with one another and as a group. The operative word is “real” in that sentence. It took me quite a few years after I left and coming to Grease Spot to realize the social dynamics of TWI is some next-level $hit !
…and truth be told, wierwille defined what was “real”.
Think about it…wierwille’s frequent reminders that feelings come and go …constant warnings to not go by your five senses and often disparaging worldly logic (which is reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity – wierwille pushed that we should reason from the principles of “The Word” – which conveniently for him always seemed to serve his best interest).
I believe what wierwille taught us was the ideal believer – the real you – but it was actually more along the lines of “The Stepford Wives” mentioned in Rocky’s post. I really think wierwille saw the ideal believer as a servile, compliant, submissive, spineless person endowed with an almost robot-like ability to suppress emotions, ignore sensory input, and turn off logical subroutines…all the while happily doing the man of God’s bidding and serving his every whim dutifully.
The weird social dynamics of TWI wages a continuous silent war on one’s personhood – and one of the major casualties of these attacks is a type of identity crisis. When I was in, I found I would often question myself – wondering if I could trust my own thinking process…at times wondering who I was and if I fit in…
Self-awareness is a conscious knowledge of our own character, true feelings, motives and desires. However, this may be difficult to perceive through that translucent overlay of TWI’s social identity “bestowed” on followers. It’s like wearing frosted glasses and looking at your own reflection in the mirror…details are diffused …individual features are not clear…this gets into a subject I find fascinating – the authentic-self versus the adaptive-self.
We are social creatures and have a natural desire to fit in. But all too often the social dynamics of a group like TWI causes discomfort, pain, fear, sadness, frustration and even anger and resentment deep down inside….
So to survive in the group and to insulate our authentic-self from further harm, we adapt somehow – we bury those things that are contrary to group-think and put on our ministry-face. Thus, our adaptive-self enables us to get along in a challenging social environment like TWI with some “success” and with the least amount of conflict with others – but often at the expense of our authentic-self going into hibernation... The longer one stays involved with TWI the more one’s authentic-self gets buried under TWI’s values, goals, priorities, contrived interpersonal skills, beliefs, behaviors - all of which serves TWI more than one’s own best interest.
To end my post on an upbeat and hopeful note, I would like to say that the real you – your authentic-self - and not some cult’s homogenized version of you, requires self-awareness and self-acceptance…self-examination is perhaps a life-long process…from time to time we may have to take stock of our beliefs and behaviors and change what doesn’t serve our best interests…that’s all for now…have a wonderful day Grease Spotters!
Edited by T-Bonetypos and formatting
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
yes i agree
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.