Talk:Cult/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 15 September 2023. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Radiant Living

Does anyone know anything about a - I don't know if it was/is a - cult named Radiant Living'? my grandmother was a member - I also associate the name 'Rudolph Steiner' with it. She died when I was young - over 55 years ago. I've googled & find it very confusing. He seems to be a teacher & RL a cosmetic industry. Anyone? Susan Jayne Garlick^talk 16:34, 4 September 2007 (CDT)

Don't know is Susan's still around, but I believe Rudolph Steiner was the founder of a Theosophy variant called Anthrosophy. Not sure if it qualified as a cult, but definitely a bit odd. --Gulik 23:16, 27 November 2008 (EST)

Mormons

"God lost his voice around 100 CE..." By this, Mormonism would be a "cult." Does the writer of that sentence want to endorse that? (Else I shall change it) Lyra Silvertongue 14:36, 10 June 2008 (EDT)

CP?

Would you even consider it? If it is, then just general right-wing intollerance and evangelism is cultish. I can see where it's coming from but I'm not 100% convinced it's quite the same as Scientology. ArmondikoV^pathetic 09:09, 5 November 2008 (EST)

I'd be tempted to say no. Doing so cheapens the meaning of the word cult, and the existence of several very public departures sorta obviates the whole 'closed circle' bit. Also, cults need a charismatic leader. --מְתֻרְגְּמָן וִיקִי ^{שְׁלֹום!}

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability. Check
2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry. Check
3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement. Not relevant to near all websites.
4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions. Check
5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil. Okay, this one might be missing.
6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances. Check
7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader. Well, plenty of websites (including this one), otherwise, not much.
8. Followers feel they can never be "good enough". This one might be missing as well, not sure.
9. The group/leader is always right. Check
10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing "truth" or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible. Pretty much check

So, out of the 10 warning signs, 1 is not relevant, and 2 are not present, that leaves us with 7 of 9 relevant warning signs present. InaVegt 09:18, 5 November 2008 (EST)

It should be noted that it doesn't seem like anything is done to persecute those who leave (other than bad-mouthing them in the group.) This is often the most important difference between a cult and a minority religion. Researcher 10:07, 5 November 2008 (EST)

I'd actually agree with Point 8 the "not good enough" bit, as clearly, you can't be right-wing enough for the upper rulers of CP. Although I'm still not convinced it's a "cult". Possibly a "cult" only in the sense of "cult TV", in which case RW is the "cult audience". ArmondikoV^pathetic 10:23, 5 November 2008 (EST)

Islam would be A cult

If "God lost his voice around 100 CE..." that would make Islam a cult wouldn't it --Dolphin674 19:57, 27 November 2008 (EST)

I believe (opinion) that somewhere in the definition of cult should be an "It's us against them" attitude, and although in many places Islam fills the bill, in many other place they are the powers-that-be, making them ineligible for cult status.

Fixed by fudging the date. PFoster 20:50, 27 November 2008 (EST)

"Smooth moves," as we used to say in the Bowel Movement.
Carptrash 22:04, 27 November 2008 (EST)

If it is, it is then a long-lived and vastly large "cult". Who controls them? Rursus dixit (yada³!) 09:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Raelism

How you call Raelism a coersive cult? It does not villify ex-members, does not force anyone to join, there is no allegation of coersion against Raelism from any member or ex-member. --Anti-cult movement 11:28, 20 February 2009 (EST)

Yes, I take your point. Having had a quick look around the net I can't seem to find any suggestions that they are "coercive", so we may need to review that. Actually we don't call them "coercive" - we say that others do. But I must say that I can't find any backup on that either. Anybody else got any ideas?--Bob^{bing up} 15:01, 20 February 2009 (EST)

The Raelian movement does not fall under the definition of cult. --Fuck You (talk) 12:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Definition

Looking at out opening section I count four definitions of the word. I would personally suggest that a "cult" is any religion you don't like - which for me would be all of them. But that would make five definitions.--Bob^{"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."} 14:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Copyright Material

It is quite clear that the list of warning signs are copied - without attibution - from Rick Ross's Cult Education site. The site is clearly copyrighted. While he (they) probably wouldn't mind we really ought to ask. Innocent Bystander (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Attributed, should be fine now - David Gerard (talk) 13:43, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

If everything is a cult, nothing is.

My edit reflects a very basic fact: We don't need to define cult as a meaningless snarl term, or, at the very least, we don't need to make that the primary definition. The word, properly defined, is a useful one and extremely on-mission for us; it goes to the heart of some very specific practices that are difficult to talk about otherwise. It might be worthwhile for us to emphasize that a cult is a group (body of people) as opposed to a religion (body of beliefs), but that might be too technical a hair for RationalWiki to split.—69.145.153.248 (talk) 01:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

List of cults

The article lists political movements and self-help groups, some of which are religious in nature, but some of which are secular, as "cults." Problem is, the article only defines a "cult" as a religious movement. Either the definition needs to be expanded, or the list narrowed. TeenageWasteland (talk) 20:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I suggest cutting out the non-religious ones. Щєазєюіδ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 21:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

EST and its descendant Landmark are nonreligious but are usually classed with cults - David Gerard (talk) 00:32, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Kool-Aid

I'd like to suggest finding a heading other than "Drink the Kool-Aid" for the info box on this article. It reinforces what is, IMO, an incomplete and stereotypical understanding of what actually happened at Jonestown. It's not as if Jones just stood up on his podium, said, "OK, everybody go drink some cyanide," and they all willingly lined up to do it. There were children and elderly there who were really not in any position to resist. I've also heard suggestions that some might have at least initially thought that this was a rehearsal for mass suicide rather than the real thing. In general, the consensus seems to be that it was a murder-suicide as opposed to a true mass suicide.

And on a minor point, the liquid ingested at Jonestown was Flavor-Aid, not Kool-Aid. ^{— Unsigned, by: 158.123.187.100 / talk / contribs}

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Also, you should direct these criticisms to Merriam-Webster or the likes, not RationalWiki. We use the expression that has been established colloquially — and that happens to be "Drink the Kool-Aid". By using that exact expression, people instantly understand what we mean (which is the point). Nobody will have a clue what we mean if it says "Drink the Flavor-Aid", because to "Drink the Flavor-Aid" is not an established expression. Like I've said before, if you have a source on the Jonestown people actually drinking Flavor-Aid, just add it as a trivia mention to the People's Temple article. Aside from that, you're barking up the wrong tree. Thanks in advance. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

BBC: Growing up a prisoner in a cult

A very elaborately designed article! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 15:13, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

AE911Truth

Shouldn't this be added somewhere here? Tinribmancer (talk) 14:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I think this video should be here somewhere

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBK5aKOr2Fw On another note sorry for the cancerous comments. Knightofjustice123 (talk) 02:22, 14 August 2017 (UTC) No brigading Knightofjustice123