Hi, It's fortunate you raised this question because I'm just in the planning stage of starting a cult and one of the things I need to do is make sure my members don't get away!!! Cheers, High Lord Greg.
Actually, it's my understanding that the Amish send their older teenagers out into the world for a year or so, just to allow them the freedom to experience other ways of life. They can then choose to join the Amish community in their own right, as young adults, or they can leave. If they decide to leave, however, they apparently can't come back. I don't think this applies to visiting their family, etc ...although I'm not sure. But they can no longer live as part of the Amish community if they don't agree to formally adopt Amish values and way of living. It's a big decision for a young person to make, but the Amish have enough faith in themselves as a community, their religion and their way of life to allow their young people to experience the outside world before knowingly committing to life inside the community. Of course these Amish teenagers will have grown up with a particular world-view, and they might not like like the notion of burning bridges and turning down a way of life that is familiar to them (and good on many levels.) However, most of us grow up with a particular world-view, given to us by parents, teachers, friends and family. It's up to us to break free of what we've been taught to believe, if that's what we choose to do. I see a big difference in the behaviour of the Amish from that of a more sinister cult. By sinister, I mean a cult that would actively prevent a person's 'escape.' You never hear of people 'escaping' the Amish, do you? They leave or stay, but it's always their choice to leave. It's just that if they choose to leave, the choice is a permanent one.
Yes, exactly. There is a documentary on Netflix right now called The Amish Shunned (by PBS) and I found it to be one of the most thoughtful, respectful insights into Amish culture that I've ever seen. They look in depth at people who choose to leave, and why, and the ramifications of that decision. They also talk about shows like Breaking Amish and talk about how inaccurate and sensationalized they are. If you are interested in learning more about the Amish, I suggest that one. But no, I don't think of the Amish as a cult. When I think of a cult, I think of these weird polygamy groups around where I live. I think of Jim Jones, Branch Dravidians (Waco), Santeria, the Manson Family, that weird sex witchcraft that Jimmy Page was a part of, the people who killed themselves to jump on that comet, and Scientology.
My cult isn't based off of any real-world religion (I hope), but I still want it to seem "real" enough to scare people.
I guess I just don't really see cult mentality as necessarily sinister, wherein the group won't allow someone to escape (though there is a lot of pressure from within the community not to do so permanently). I do see it as a way of life one chooses to live and grow their young in, where should you choose to reject the lifestyle, you're shunned from family and friends. Many people I know who grew up Mormon would argue that it is cultic, and I have a lot of friends who grew up in fundamentalist Christian families who feel the same way. I think the word "cult" brings images of Waco and Jonestown, but I don't think that's always necessarily the case. The definition is simply "a relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister." But I get what you're saying, and I do respect the Amish for allowing their youngsters to choose; though I'd never be able to cut off contact with my children if they chose a different religion from me, as is custom in the amish community with the practice of "shunning."
Well no, neither would I. But it's part and parcel of the life they choose to lead. As long as they leave the choice open to others, then I see no problem. Lots of religions do that, actually. It's one of the things I dislike about organised religion in general. It can spawn intolerance. I think 'cult' is a word that gets applied too often, sometimes. Any minority belief or lifestyle system is often called a 'cult.' "Cult" can be used as a dismissive or perjorative term, but that's a subjective thing. By 'sinister' cult, I mean the kinds of groups that coerce members into the group and then refuse to allow them to leave. That's sinister, no matter what you call it, in my view.
There was a show about this on Channel 5 in the Uk last night. They had someone talking about leaving and the troubles she had. http://www.channel5.com/shows/trapped-in-a-cult If you're not in the U.K, it hasn't been added to youtube yet unfortunatly. The main one you would probably be interested in was the tale of a woman who started to question the leaders motives. Here is a bullet point version of the story. -Her and her husband were recruited by a 'healing centre'. They loved it to begin with and were planning to buy their own healing centre to further the cause. - Leader convinced them to join 'the inner circle' and to do that they needed to give up all of their money and possessions. - They were not allowed to read newspapers, use phones, watch tv etc. No outside communication (stripping people of support networks is important in a cult). - Any questions she had about the teachings were seen as her wanting to hang onto her old life and bad habits, damaging thinking etc or just not understanding enough yet. - When she heard that the leader had given a large amount of money to their daughter to open their own healing centre, she started to question why had her daughter been given this honour when she wasn't even taught in the ways of 'healing'. - When she wanted to leave she had nothing. No money (she gave it to them), No place to stay (same), No real friends (she lost most of them). She ended up calling an aquintence to help pick her up and went pretty much straight to the woman who would deprogram her. - She then went into a lengthy court battle to get her money back, and her own husband (still in the cult) fought against her along with all her friends in the cult. (she did get the money back). They didn't go too much into the deprograming techniques, but as cult membership is alot like abuse (in that the mind finds ways to normalise it) in how you need to get people out of it. You need to get people to see their own worth, show them the inconsistances in their thinking (cognitive dissonance) which is when people say things like "The leader was such a peace loving man", "The leader hit me for trying to use the phone". Here you can see that one idea of the leader is out of line with the other, these can help people see that the leader was a bad person. Anyway hope this helps a little.
By that definition, every religion in the world is a cult, because it's certain that there is an aspect to every religion that a non-believer would find strange, if not sinister. I was just reading an article the other day about how the definition of the word "cult" is hotly debated among theologians because no one can quite decide exactly what qualifies as a cult. I will go track it down and link it here. It might be useful for people wanting to develop their own fictional cult, as the OP is trying to do. For me personally, the difference between a cult and a general religion is two part: whether or not people may leave of their own volition, and whether or not members are taught to sever ties with family and friends who do not share the beliefs of the group.
So, if they can technically leave of their own accord despite immense pressure to stay (due to the consequences of leaving) and a lack of preparedness in living in society as we know it, but part two applies, it doesn't qualify as cultic in your opinion? Just trying to understand whether or not both parts must be at play for you, and if one part without the other disqualifies it in your opinion. And if that's the case, if they can't leave the group of their own accord, but can still contact outside friends and family, does it still not count as a cult in your view? Not trying to debate what is or is not a cult, because I think that's open to interpretation, just trying to understand your thought process. For me, it's very easy for me to see all of the "fine lines," so to speak, and if enough of them are at play, then I question the institution -- be it religious or otherwise. I don't have a formula, and I rarely say "yes, definitely. THAT is a cult", but I can see how one might feel that many different institutions are cult-like. Not all of them are, and more of them are than we freely admit. My personality just isn't set up for black and white situations where THAT is a cult and THAT is not a cult (this applies in many areas of my life, and it always makes for interesting discussions).
Defining a cult is bound to be difficult to do, just like defining a freedom fighter. To someone that believes in it they see it from a positive and to someone that doesn't then they could see it as a negative. Some see Scientology as a cult, and i have seen some regular religious people definitely look like the are under the 'control' of their religion (you know the ones, they often get called ' creepy <<insert religion>>). Really hard to define it unless you want to stereotype it which would be one leader, probably sleeps with the female members, who claims to be more spiritual than others and know the way to elevate a person to holy heights. They brainwash people into following them, having his children and often it ends either in them all dying or a bloody government shoot out Waco style.
With an imaginary religion, I'd say it's harder to define what would open a person's eyes. Plato's allegory of the the cave is always a good analogy of what it's like to have greater insight, but most cults have a smaller percentage that will supposedly be saved. The main themes, as I see it, would be exposing how small a number of the population will be redeemed according to the doctrine of the cult, for one. And showing how scripture has been twisted to suit the purpose of the cult, while also showing what the scriptures intend, would be the strongest approach.
Hi, Further to my last post - you'll be glad to know my new psychotickian cult - make that fellowship is coming along well - some general thoughts. First defining a cult is always going to be problematic. There is no set rule for what they are or what tenats they follow. They don't even have to be religious. There are political cults. It's better in my view to consider not what makes them a cult but rather what makes them bad. And there it usually comes down to things like disempowering followers, removing the ability of many to think for themselves, preventing dissent, isolating people from the outside world / family. All those basic control issues. Removing people from a cult would involve I'm guessing, giving people back those self empowering abilities. Thus encouraging people to think for themselves. It would also involve creating cognitive dissonance - making them see that certain things don't match what they believe. For example a cult leader says something about peace and so forth, but then you make former followers have to look at the gun collection / armed guards etc. Luckily that won't happen to followers of Psychotick!!! Cheers, Greg.
Immense pressure to stay and being unprepared to live life beyond the cult, in my mind, falls under the "not being able to leave of their own volition." If they can't walk out with a simple, "Oh, you're leaving? Darn. Wish you wouldn't, but okay," reaction, then it is cultic. You draw comfort in being able to broadly define the word so that it may apply to anything. I draw comfort in more narrowly defining the word so that I can organize my world into categories, always with the understanding that some things will cross lines and not fit into any category at all. I don't think Catholicism, Islam, Mormonism, Buddhism, Mainstream Christianity, or any of the other larger world religions are cultic, but under your definition, you do. Different people, different thoughts. Doesn't mean either one of us is right or wrong. Yes, I agree, which is why I prefaced my comment with saying "for me, personally." This is the process I think in my mind when I think of a cult. In no way am I trying to declare it as the end-all authoritative definition. Like I said earlier, it's a topic that is hotly debated. I like what you said about it being like defining a freedom fighter. That is very true. Yep, I'm pretty sure the super intense MLM that my mother-in-law's a part of could be considered cultish. Haha yeah, these things often have a way of getting away from you. They usually come back around though! Sorry we hijacked your thread. Back to the point, do you feel like you've got more of an idea to work with now? Or are you still feeling indecisive?
I think I've got a good idea on how to write it out. I just need to develop this "therapist" character more.
