Originally posted by galveston75I think it's about [1] dogma, [2] the sense of being set apart and the carefully cultivated sense of "otherness" and exceptional-ism, and [3] the resulting intellectual and interpersonal behavior.
So should the criticism of one person quailfy a religion to be a cult or does it take a hundred or ten thousand critacal opinions to make it a cult?
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI think it can and it may simply be intellectual laziness not to attempt to establish characteristics and simply to leave it to gut feeling, after all, that's what these forums are for, are they not?
I don't think the sense that a group is a "cult" can be enumerated in terms of number of "accepted ideas". I think the accusation is much more of a "gut feeling" thing, a repulsion, a feeling of caution, sympathy, ruefulness etc.
Originally posted by FMFThere are some cults that their unorthox beliefs have proven to be a danger to their members and sometimes the society in general. Other cults are less dangerous and governments have been able to tolerate them or in some cases able to over-rule their bizarre belief practices. The JWs are a well tolerated cult by the governments of all nations.
I think it's about [1] dogma, [2] the sense of being set apart and the carefully cultivated sense of "otherness" and exceptional-ism, and [3] the resulting intellectual and interpersonal behavior.
Originally posted by RJHindsKnowing that there are many religions out there that are called a cult, why do you zero in on the Witnesses? Is there some special hate you have for them or do you hate others also? Why do you never mention the other ones?
There are some cults that their unorthox beliefs have proven to be a danger to their members and sometimes the society in general. Other cults are less dangerous and governments have been able to tolerate them or in some cases able to over-rule their bizarre belief practices. The JWs are a well tolerated cult by the governments of all nations.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieTo my way of thinking it is a damaged word and it's used to express a gut feeling about a given group. If you want to dub this point of view a product of "intellectual laziness" on my part, then so be it. I've been called much worse.
I think it can and it may simply be intellectual laziness not to attempt to establish characteristics and simply to leave it to gut feeling, after all, that's what these forums are for, are they not?
Originally posted by galveston75The Hate Card has been played yet again, ladies and gentlemen.
Knowing that there are many religions out there that are called a cult, why do you zero in on the Witnesses? Is there some special hate you have for them or do you hate others also? Why do you never mention the other ones?
Originally posted by galveston75It has nothing to do with my hatred of cults. I actually like the JWs inspite of their unorthodox and sometime bizarre beliefs. I was really making this comment in relation to the most recent thread questioning if the JWs were a cult. I do believe they are a cult of Christianity and they are not really Christian in their distorted core beliefs. 😏
Knowing that there are many religions out there that are called a cult, why do you zero in on the Witnesses? Is there some special hate you have for them or do you hate others also? Why do you never mention the other ones?
Originally posted by FMFonce again, its not about you, but to simply state that we cannot define a term because of its use or misuses in the common culture is intellectually lazy.
To my way of thinking it is a damaged word and it's used to express a gut feeling about a given group. If you want to dub this point of view a product of "intellectual laziness" on my part, then so be it. I've been called much worse.
Originally posted by FMFhe consistently makes references to Jehovahs Witnesses in threads that are not about Jehovahs witnesses, that makes him a hater, but I will be very pleased if neither you, nor Hiinds nor anyone else wrecks my thread on the definition of a cult with these childish pot shots.
The Hate Card has been played yet again, ladies and gentlemen.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't think I am being "intellectually lazy" at all. I've told you what I think people MEAN when they use the word "cult" and what group characteristics and member attributes it is I think they may be referring to. I have also said that I rarely use the word because it is emotive and laden with subjectivity, and that my attempted "definition" will not further the debate by offering yet another supposedly 'objective' definition. There is a 'reality' about this word and its use that you are not going to alter by insisting on yet another subjective definition from em. Far from being "intellectually lazy", I think I have demonstrated some intellectual integrity in the way I have addressed this word and the way people use it.
once again, its not about you, but to simply state that we cannot define a term because of its use or misuses in the common culture is intellectually lazy.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieGood grief, The Hate Card has been played yet again, ladies and gentlemen. How long's it been? It was played against me a day or two ago too. 😵
he consistently makes references to Jehovahs Witnesses in threads that are not about Jehovahs witnesses, that makes him a hater, but I will be very pleased if neither you, nor Hiinds nor anyone else wrecks my thread on the definition of a cult with these childish pot shots.