- Topic
http://youtu.be/fNWi6ADnM7M "beware" cog Garden Grove Cali
http://youtu.be/H1hSZa-68cs Part 1 mother god
http://youtu.be/gpbqwbsbrFg Part 2 mother god
Wow Questioninginla, you seem to know a lot! I wonder if you are a psychiatrist? Are you an expert in medical knowledge? You seem to make a lot of bold claims. Lets see what actual scientests, actual doctors, and all the phychiatrists in the American Psychological Association think about your claims:
brainwashing /brain·wash·ing/ (brān´wahsh″ing) any systematic effort aimed at instilling certain attitudes and beliefs in a person against their will, usually beliefs in conflict with prior beliefs and knowledge.
brain·wash·ing (brnwshng) n. Inducing a person to modify his or her beliefs, attitudes, or behavior by conditioning through various forms of pressure or torture.
Brainwashing Any mental manipulation intended to change, and ultimately control, the mind of another person, who is held against his/her volition and subjected to psychologic pressure or torture
totalitarian regimes appeared to succeed systematically in indoctrinating prisoners of war through propaganda and torture techniques. ^ Wright, Stuart (December 1997). "Media Coverage of Unconventional Religion: Any "Good News" for Minority Faiths?". Review of Religious Research 39 (2): 101–115.
By placing the prisoners under conditions of physical and social deprivation and disruption, and then by offering them more comfortable situations such as better sleeping quarters, better food, warmer clothes or blankets, the Chinese did succeed in getting some of the prisoners to make anti-American statements. Nevertheless, the majority of prisoners did not actually adopt Communist beliefs, … such coercive persuasion succeeded only on a minority of POWs … Schein published Coercive Persuasion[13] and Lifton published Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism.[14]
social scientists sympathetic to the anti-cult movement, who were usually psychologists, developed more sophisticated models of brainwashing.[28] While some psychologists were receptive to these theories, sociologists were for the most part skeptical of their ability to explain conversion to NRMs. Barker, Eileen (1986). "Religious Movements: Cult and Anti-Cult Since Jonestown". Annual Review of Sociology 12: 329–346
In the 1998 Enquete Commission report on "So-called Sects and Psychogroups" in Germany, a review was made of the BITE model. The report concluded that "control of these areas of action is an inevitable component of social interactions in a group or community. The social control that is always associated with intense commitment to a group must … be … distinguished from … intentional … manipulation." Final Report of the Enquete Commission on "So-called Sects and Psychogroups" New Religious and Ideological Communities and Psychogroups in the Federal Republic of Germany
James Richardson observes that if the NRMs had access to powerful brainwashing techniques, one would expect that NRMs would have high growth rates, yet in fact most have not had notable success in recruitment. Most adherents participate for only a short time, and the success in retaining members is limited. ^ Richardson, James T. (1985-06). "The active vs. passive convert: paradigm conflict in conversion/recruitment research". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 24, No. 2) 24 (2): 163–179. doi:10.2307/1386340. JSTOR 1386340.
For this and other reasons, sociologists of religion including David Bromley and Anson Shupe consider the idea that "cults" are brainwashing American youth to be "implausible." http://www.religioustolerance.org/brain_wa.htm
In 1983, the American Psychological Association (APA) asked Margaret Singer to … investigate whether brainwashing or "coercive persuasion" did indeed play a role in … such movements … the amicus curiæ brief written by the APA denies the credibility of the brainwashing theory ^ Zablocki, Benjamin (2001). Misunderstanding Cults: Searching for Objectivity in a Controversial Field. U. of Torono Press. p. 168. ISBN 0-8020-8188-6.
The brief repudiated Singer's theories on "coercive persuasion" and suggested that brainwashing theories were without empirical proof. http://www.cesnur.org/testi/molko_brief.htm
When you had your first studies, you were not tortured. When you had your first studies, you were not drugged. When you had your first studies, you were not threatened or coerced.
Your claims misrepresent the actions of Brothers and Sisters who, after willfully and in great joy accepting the truth of the gospel, they then in act of faith did certain deeds which you criticize. Deeds which were done AFTER not before, learning and accepting the full and complete truth.
You are blatantly misrepresenting medical facts in an attempt to villify us, your staggeringly low self-esteem cannot accept the fact that we believe theese things without any malicious intentions or intentional manipulation. You want to play the role of a victim and cry boo-hoo to get sympathy tears, because by playing to people's emotions you can confuse the truth.
No one is falling for your stupid and uneducated claims.
Emil
"I don't see those as major issues of doctrine."
Thank you for pointing out that you believe it is okay to change interpretations and words in the bible as long as its "not major".
But Jesus rebukes you Lawless People, and Apostle Paul thinks differently than you do:
1 Corinthians 11:16 If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice–nor do the churches of God.
If you want to have an "other practice" YOU ARE NOT A CHURCH OF GOD
Thank you Q, I knew you would clear that up for me and you never used the word brainwashing once. Well done
And you didn't cut and paste your answer either! Also very impressive!
Try to confuse semantics more, Harry. I'm sure people love it when you confuse facts in order to win arguments.
Mind control (also known as brainwashing, coercive persuasion, mind abuse, menticide, thought control, or thought reform)
It is all the same thing.
As expressed on page 1 of this thread.
All of your claims are ridiculous in the extreme.
Excuse me, I was not speaking to you. let's get something straight, YOU, do not ever speak to me under any circumstances, EVER! If you have something to say to me, tell your friend FTOS and he can speak to me because HE, amuses me and you do NOT. Let's not pretend we don't know who the fuckin players are here.
That sounds suspiciously like information control to me Harry, careful you don't get caught in this forum community's double-standards.
Which would actually be pretty amusing, if your entire premise wasn't wrong to begin with.
144000 wrote:
That sounds suspiciously like information control to me Harry, careful you don't get caught in this forum community's double-standards.
Which would actually be pretty amusing, if your entire premise wasn't wrong to begin with.
Don't push it bro, it won't end well…
Wow 144,000 are you this stupid in the real world?
Regarding against their will being conditioned to believe lies is ALWAYS against ones will
That whole thread was an appeal to authority fallacy anyways with no actual value. Banging your head on the keyboard would have been as valuable to the thread
Regarding information control controlling what information you listen to is completely different from dictating what information OTHERS access
Thank you Simon I am glad that my thorough research into the topic has not gone unnoticed.
First of all there are no lies, only people that have been fined for slander in the past because they fabricated evidence and witnesses. And before someone jumps in to say “but I know what I learned” I will again remind you that you are in a distinctly tiny and very confused minority whom has misinterpreted what the rest of us understand with crystal clarity.
Your claim that people are learning things against their will hinges on you slandering us by calling it a lie. It also hinges on disrespecting freedom of religion and belief.
Furthermore, and most importantly of all:
My post was not an appeal to authority. It was an appeal to empirical evidence and hard facts.
The fact is, you don’t understand what REAL brainwashing is. Real brainwashing involves drugs, threats, or torture. I don’t think you understand the severity needed for theese methods to be practical in reprogramming a human mind.
The fact is, mind control is a garbage theory that no one has ever provided emperical evidence for. The only thing that comes remotely close to it is how PRISONERS OF WAR were TORTURED. Literally physically tortured. And even then RESULTS VARIED.
I appeal to evidence, and evidence testifies that brainwashing theories posed by armchair-psychologists like yourselves are beyond delusional.
Mind Control is a term used by the ignorant to distract attention from their delusional behaviour and abysmal self-esteem by pointing fingers and villifying someone else.
144000 wrote:
Emil
"I don't see those as major issues of doctrine."
Thank you for pointing out that you believe it is okay to change interpretations and words in the bible as long as its "not major".
Once again you add words in my mouth. I don't see things like wearing of veils a major doctrinal issue because it is subject to interpretation. There is no change in interpretation, nor change in the words of the bible. You guys come up with your own interpretations all the time. That is why such doctrinal beliefs are relatively of lower precedence.
Highest precedence must be given to who one worships rather than these things. You are shying away from my central point.
For the record, my wife wears a veil in church and has been doing so for years. But we don't see it as an essential tenet of our faith. Her wearing a veil or not wearing one wouldn't change the God we worship.
Why do you only respond to me on these things? Why do you avoid responding on how Ahn did not restore the passover?
144000 wrote:
Thank you Simon I am glad that my thorough research into the topic has not gone unnoticed.
For all those who have been impressed with 144000's "thorough research", here's the link from which he copy/pasted everything:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_control
One single wikipedia page of research.
LOL no confusion Zhang isn’t God ahn isn’t god therefore its a lie
I totally respect your freedom of religion
And no it was an appeal to authority and you provided ZERO evidence merely claims of “experts”
Well, at least now we know their stance on the Wikipedia thing…
The very same Wiki page also has this nugget which our friend did not provide to us:
Other scholars disagree with this consensus amongst sociologists of religion. Benjamin Zablocki asserts that it's obvious that brainwashing occurs, at least to any objective observer; the "real sociological issue", he states, is whether "brainwashing occurs frequently enough to be considered an important social problem".[41] Zablocki disagrees with scholars like Richardson, stating that Richardson's observation is flawed.[45] According to Zablocki, Richardson misunderstands brainwashing, conceiving of it as a recruiting process, instead of a retaining process.[45] So although Richardson's data are correct, Zablocki states, properly understood, brainwashing does not imply that NRMs will have a notable success in recruitment; so the criticism is inapt.[45] Additionally, Zablocki attempts to debunk the other criticisms Richardson, et al., apply to brainwashing: if Zablocki is correct, there's a plethora of evidence in favor of the claim that some NRMs brainwash some of their members.[45] Perhaps most notably, Zablocki says, the sheer number of former cult leaders and ex-members who attest to brainwashing in interviews (performed in accordance with guidelines of the National Institute of Mental Health and National Science Foundation) is too large to be a result of anything other than a genuine phenomenon.[46] Zablocki also reveals that of two most prestigious journals dedicated to the sociology of religion, the number of articles "supporting the brainwashing perspective" have been zero, while over one hundred such articles have been published in other journals "marginal to the field".[47] From this fact, Zablocki concludes that the concept 'brainwashing' has been "blacklisted" unfairly from the field of sociology of religion.[47] Moreover, Zablocki claims that some prominent scholars who do not share his viewpoint have received "lavish funding" from NRMs.[41] Stephen A. Kent has also published several articles about brainwashing.
@Harry. Thank you. I see you noticed the cut & paste as well by our pal. Yes, I go from memory the majority of the time and then to my library….wait for it….of all the books that I have read on the subject. The issue up for discussion is, in my opinion, one of many disciplines, those being (and this may not be an all-inclusive list) psychology, sociology, communications/linguistics, political science, and anthropology.So, while I am assuming that 144000 cuts and pastes information about Lifton's "Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism", I have actually read the book. It is interesting to note that while the groundbreaking book by Lifton addresses the physical duress of POWs and their subsequent "brainwashing", a significant portion of the book is devoting to the Chinese Communists' re-education efforts (the youth, interestingly enough) which mimicked the POW settings as it pertained to the very same process of influencing thought sans the physical abuse. Shortcut reading here is Chapter 17 "George Chen: The Conversions of Youth". George admits that being removed from the thought reform environment of the re-education system shifted his thought, "When I was on the mainland I had to suppress this original affection and favor….But once arriving in Hong Kong, the suppression was relieved and my ideas naturally went back to their original form. On the mainland I thought the Communist aims to be just, and that I should devote myself to them….In Hong Kong, I thought the Communist aims were but lies" (pg 321).
Reminder: this is not a POW setting with George Chen.
Page 320 addresses guilt when George was not as zealous as the others in the re-education effort. "I felt ashamed that I was less full of hate than the others" (less full of hate for the United States or Japan).
Conformity of clothing began to take place during the students' re-education campaign. They rid themselves of (what could be argued "otherworldly") western style blue jeans. The wearing of a uniform is important in these types of campaigns. It doesn't matter if it is orange colored clothing, military garb, or whatnot – as long as people look alike; easily establishing "insider" from "outsider".
And that's just Lifton.
144000 wrote:
My post was not an appeal to authority. It was an appeal to empirical evidence and hard facts.
I beg to differ. At one point in the history of mankind medical doctors had no clue about germs and their ability to cause disease. You will come to see someday that you did nothing more than develop a thesis and find the information so the hypothesis could support it.
If you were doing any homework at all, you would have identified that Lifton was discredited during the Patty Hearst trial as trying to push his own theory.
144000 wrote:
The fact is, you don't understand what REAL brainwashing is. Real brainwashing involves drugs, threats, or torture.
Real brainwashing does involve drugs, threats, or torture. It also involves non-violent means as well, which are more effective and more cost-efficient. One need not bear the costs of jailers, torturers, and jail-space when one can gain access to an individual's time and attention long enough to change belief. The doctrine is just a way of bringing followers to the state of bounded choice, which brings us to control mechanisms.
Thank you, 144000, for stating "threats" for us! Fear is one of the greatest motivators. Threats of losing salvation and ostracization is seen over and over in groups that use "brainwashing" (in the case of political or other non-religious groups, the "cause" is substituted for "salvation"; for example being a leader in spreading revolutionary communism in the Democratic Workers Party). Of course, it is rarely seen by members "in-group" to see this as a threat that binds them to the group because at this point the process is internalized. This is why members of controlling groups will easily identify other people as being brainwashed or controlled by, for example, the "Moonies" but never "me". "I make my own decisions". So too, say current Moonies. Which brings us back to cost-effectiveness. At this point there is zero cost for jailers, torturers, or jail space because the individual is bound by choices presented them in an ever polarized world – one which the individual has come to believe in – thus the individual is one's own jailer at this point.
144000 wrote:
The fact is, mind control is a garbage theory that no one has ever provided emperical evidence for.
Enlighten us then on how the Moonies, JWs, AJ Miller, Heaven's Gate, et al. get their followers to follow…..
sorry for possible tldnr
@144000 – you tried to refute my point by bringing in 1 Cor 11:16. This was in connection with 1 Cor 11:5 which urges women to cover their head during worship.
However, as Smurf pointed out, you quoted verse 16 but not the preceding verse which says:
1 Cor 11:15 – but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering.
Paul is linking head covering during worship to women wearing their hair long.
Why is it that ZGJ wears her hair short? If the veil of verse 5 is essential, why is the long hair not?
Technically he is using it as an example not saying hair is the covering
That is not my point. Paul is saying that a woman ought to cover her head during worship while a man shouldn't. He reasons this out by saying that it is in the nature of things that men have short hair while women grow their hair long.
Since that is the way he puts forth his case, it must also follow that the one who considers verse 5 to be a command must also accept what he says in verse 15. ZGJ, on the other hand, has shorter hair than many men in Korea.
I would like one of the 3 (wise?) men to refute this.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.