In this section, the reader will familiarize themselves with the learning and knowledge of the leaders in the field of human psychology. In particular, the cult mind. Some of the referrences in here are sarcastic, intended to awaken the decieved mind into recognizing their deception. In the case of religious deception when debating with the fundemental Christian mind, nothing you will say, no matter how logical or reasonable or based in fact, will be able to overcome the logic  employed by Christians to "Prove" that Jesus is the saviour, and Messiah...so essentially, anything you have to say about it, is obviously devil inspired, and anyone that believes as you do is clearly "the devils spawn".. Since Jesus is truth, and the alledged embodiment of all that truth, what reason or logic could an apostate like yourself have to offer to the "enlightened Christian mind".. The following Article posted on the web anonomously (I can't find the author), should demonstrate to the reader the mindset that must be maintained to debate "truth" with a decieved mind...As expected of course those individuals think they posses great truths...because if you had truth...you of course would believe in Jesus the same as they do...? Martin Luther, the "Great Protestant Reformer" had a lot to say about reason. To me it sounds like he was oppossed to the idea of an individual being able to think freely and independently, not having to depend on the church authority to lead and guide them..Reason was the ENEMY of true freedom, which in Luthers mind was expressed through the church...(The Catholic Church) Here are some quotes from Luther on reason... “As for the demented, I hold it certain that all beings deprived of reason are thus afflicted only by the Devil.” ”Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but—more frequently than not—struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.” ”Reason should be destroyed in all Christians.” ”Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of his Reason.” ”Reason is the Devil’s greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil’s appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets.” ”There is on earth among all dangers no more dangerous thing than a richly endowed and adroit reason...Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. HOW TO THINK LIKE A FUNDIE!!! Planning a career in online Christian fundamentalist apologetics? How about the exciting world of Young-Earth Creationism? Witnessing to, and debating with, atheists and other hellbound unsaved sinners on the internet can be hard work, so you need to familiarise yourself with the tried and tested methods used by fundies all around the world. After completing this simple training course, the shadow of doubt will never again flicker across your mind whilst listening to the lies and deceptions of those ignorant infidels who disagree with your self- evident truths. 1) Inerrancy First and foremost, the Bible is the absolute, literal word of God. Contrary to popular opinion, it contains none of the following: errors of any kind contradictions absurdities When you understand this, dealing with those who claim to have found a contradiction is simplicity itself: there are no contradictions, so he cannot have found one! You see? Easy, isn’t it? If your opponent continues in his error after having this explained to him (nice and slowly), elaborate on your answer using an appropriate response from the following list: That translation is incorrect - in the original texts a different word is used, so it is not a contradiction. He is taking the verses out of context, so there is no contradiction. Satan has blinded him to the truth. There is no contradiction, and he should pray to be shown the correct meaning. This is only an apparent contradiction. That is not the same as an actual contradiction. If the verses are interpreted correctly, it is obvious that there is no contradiction. There are no contradictions in the Bible, so this is not a contradiction. The contradiction is caused by his anachronistic thinking. The word [insert word here] had a different meaning back then. Having just demonstrated that the supposed contradictions do not exist, you have now proved that there are no contradictions in the Bible, reinforcing your claim that it is truly the unsullied Holy Word of God. 2) Science There is but one measuring stick required to determine the truth of any claim - how it compares with Holy Scripture. More precisely, how it compares with your personal reading of Scripture. So, if some secular humanist scientists dare to dream up a theory (or “wild guess”, as it is more accurately known) that apparently conflicts with the teachings of the Bible, clearly these egg-head mad professors have made yet another idiotic mistake, possibly under demonic influence. How do we know they are mistaken? See “1 Inerrancy”. Conversely, when science agrees with the Bible we should applaud the brave, Bible-believing investigators for supporting the Holy Word and showing the glory of Creation. But usually they are wrong. Never forget, the atheists are quick to use the findings of science as “evidence” in their arguments, but this is because materialism and science are their god and religion. They want the men in white coats to save them from the God they know will judge them. 3) Debating techniques Here we delve into the murky world of online debating with heathens. You can witness to lost souls in USENET newsgroups (such as alt. atheism and talk.origins), or in message fora on their websites. Self contradiction In a heated argument, you will often find yourself losing track of your previous posts, and the atheist will often accuse you of contradicting comments you made earlier. As your words are Bible-based, it stands to reason that they should therefore be correct at all times. Refer to “1 Inerrancy”. Alternatively, remember that, as slaves of The Evil One, atheists will do their best to twist your words and attempt to confuse you. If this appears to be happening, ignore their comments and pray for strength. Logic and reason These are the playthings of the unbeliever, and you should have no truck with them. Faith in the Lord is all you need. The atheist will try to imply that God should be bound by the rules of logic, but God invented logic and so cannot be constrained by it! The more illogical and unreasoning you are, the harder it becomes for atheists to refute your statements. They will scream “But that doesn’t make sense! It is logically impossible!” - be that as it may, your faith will tell you that you are correct. With God, all things are possible - including impossible things. What more do you need? The burden of proof is on the skeptic “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” you will be told. But just who is making the extraordinary claim here? You, who simply observe the Creator’s hand in all things, or the infidel who against all logic and reason denies the very same. Clearly, it is incumbent on the unbelievers to support their ludicrous assertions that there is no God. Ask them if they can prove God does not exist. Ask how they can be so arrogant to make this claim, when they have not searched the entire universe for God. They will come back and ask you to disprove the existence of Zeus, Vishnu and unicorns, but you should dismiss such childish nonsense - there is no comparison between the fairy-tale gods of other religions and the Truth of Christianity, Their inability to disprove God is evidence enough that He is real. If they cannot overturn your theory, they are clearly being unreasonable by refusing to accept it. Repeating yourself After spending a few days debating with a group of atheists, you should leave them alone for a week or so. This will give them time to come to terms with the truths you have revealed. Also, it will provide time for new people to join the discussion. This allows you to return to the forum once more and repeat your statements, unchanged, for the benefit of newcomers. We recommend storing your longer arguments in a text file, so it can be easily cut-and-pasted into the forum. If the forum regulars object, explain that, having already corrected their misconceptions, you are now simply trying to reach the new members and those who still unreasonably reject the truth. If they are civilised people, they will respect this and stand aside. Repeat this technique until you are banned from the board or placed in everybody’s killfile. Huge posts To take the wind out of your opponent’s sails, reply to the smallest query with pages and pages of text. Ideally, you should spend a couple of hours writing this yourself, but if you don’t have the time cut-and-paste relevant (or, if possible, irrelevant) information from other Christian websites or resources. Try to spend at least ten kilobytes explaining why they should pray more, why they should fear Hell, how Christ died for their sins, why prominent Christian philosophers and scientists disagree with them, how long-dead Christians have already proven them wrong, and so on. Ask as many obscure questions as possible. If they are truly sincere (which, being atheists, is impossible) they will answer all of your points. If they fail to answer all of your points and questions, victory is yours. Make a note of this humiliating defeat and remember to bring it up often when dealing with this particular individual. (This is also a handy technique to use during a live debate with evolutionists. ) A variant on this theme is to post numerous verses from the Bible to support your argument. Why bother with a hundred words of explanation, when a single verse will do it all for you. Simply post the verse that refutes the atheist, and then maybe two or three more referring to hellfire. As the verses are known to be true, little more need be said on the matter. If the atheist predictably comes back with a counter argument, post the same verses again but suggest that he actually read them this time. Grammar and spelling Are not important, as long as the Spirit guides you. If you are criticised for being unable to form a sentence in English, or using words like “athiset”, “Noahs arc”, “evolotin” and “revilatian” - worry not. It is not the trivia of punctuation and spelling which is important, but getting the message of God across. Consider this excellent example. To the untrained eye, the writer may appear to be an illiterate, ignorant dolt, but just feel the love in his words: ”i was wonder if you yourself knew that darwin disowned his theroy in his last days knowing that fossils show species suddenly appering not sight mutations made over long periods of time. the fact is eveolution is total improvible.” Only the coldest of hearts could not be moved by such testimony. This is the sort of level of incoherent drooling you should be aiming for. You should combine a flimsy grasp of the English language with your own distinctive writing style. The following are quite fashionable at the moment: writing everything in lower case without any punctuation at all this can be quite difficult to read but is very easy to type which is a bonus dont you think ALTERNATIVELY, WRITE EVERYTHING IN CAPS. THIS MAKES YOUR IMPORTANT MESSAGE STAND OUT AND PEOPLE WILL TAKE NOTICE OF IT AND REALISE THAT YOU REALLY MEAN IT. short, disjointed.....sentences separated by long......strings of dots.....this makes you look quite.....thoughtful as if you are......pausing every now and......then. Overuse of exclamation marks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! can emphasise the point you are trying to make!!!!!!!!!!!! Question marks also work well, don’t they??????????????????????????? Show ur mastery of the Internet by using words like “u” instead of “you”, “2” instead of “to” and “too”, “ur” instead of “your” and “you’re”, and u 2 can spread the gospel 2 other kewl d00dz. If English is not your first language, all the better. The way you present your argument says a lot about you, so pick wisely. Knowledge of the subject Whether you are talking about evolution, the origins of the universe, basic human anatomy, or the structure of the solar system, there is no need to concern yourself with learning anything at all about the issue. See “1 Inerrancy”. By definition, those who disagree with you are wrong, deluded and possibly perverts, so it is a bad idea to pollute your mind with their religious beliefs. All the evidence in the world is no match for a single grain of the True Faith. If they say “But evolution doesn’t work like that! You are completely clueless!” remind them that evolution doesn’t actually work at all. Has a cow ever given birth to a dog? Do we see hydrogen turning into people around us? If we “evolved” from chimps, why are there still chimps? Why do we not see amoebae sprouting legs and talking? These harsh insights will cut through their dogma like a hot knife through butter. If they refer you to papers or websites showing that the universe is billions of years old, refer them in turn to Genesis. Explain how carbon dating methods have been shown to be hopelessly flawed. For instance, when the Turin Shroud was dated, the so-called experts put it around the 14th Century, instead of 33AD. This obviously calls into question all the other radiometric dating guesses they will throw around. Definitions of words Words can often mean several different things. For example, the word “set” has dozens of meanings : a set of things; a badger lives in a set; a jelly will set; you can set something down on a table; you can set up a meeting; and so on. Words mean what you need them to mean at any particular time. This is a common reason why you will find atheists misunderstanding things - they think you mean one thing, when actually you were talking about something else. It’s hardly your fault if they are unable to keep up, is it? For example, Genesis speaks of a mist rising from the ground to water the Earth. This can mean : mist, rain, dew, fog, clouds, water vapour, condensation, snow, hail, sleet or any other conceivable form of precipitation. Let the Spirit guide you in this matter, and if the atheist claims you are mistaken or contradicting yourself, let the Spirit guide you once more to the true definition of the word. This may happen many times, as you can easily misinterpret the Spirit’s guidance 4) Mental gymnastics Lying for Jesus Being economical with the truth, making up data on the spot and ignoring conflicting evidence are all handy weapons in your arsenal. The important thing is to convince the opponent of the veracity of your claims. Just how you go about this is unimportant. Feel free to refer to other fundamentalist works, whether or not they have been supposedly “discredited”, “refuted” or “demonstrated to be false” - the ICR website and publications, Jack Chick tracts, Dr.Dino’s website and videos, Answers In Genesis, things you remember hearing from other fundies or as a child in Sunday School, and so on. When comparing the works of God-fearing, Bible-believing Christians against deviant secular humanist scientists, who are you going to believe? Remember, you are here to save their immortal soul from the burning fires of Hell, not educate them in stuff they don’t really need to know anyway. If you have a dubious argument based on fictional data, but it works, then there is no problem. The vital matter is bringing souls to Jesus and how you go about that is immaterial. The ends justify the means, and in this case the “ends” are souls being saved. Such a noble and worthy goal itself justifies any means you see fit to use. Physical force is generally frowned upon, although there are clear historical precedents for this. Use your own judgement. Don’t forget, the Lord is watching at all times, and will certainly forgive you as long as you are spreading His good news. So go to it! Compartmentalisation In this world, what you know to be true often conflicts with the reality around you. To be a soldier for Christ it will help enormously if you can master the technique of mental compartmentalisation. This means you must be able to keep your scriptural knowledge away from the secular knowledge that allows you to function in wordly matters, e.g. at your place of work. For example, even though science is clearly mistaken about the processes involved in radioactive decay (see the “carbon dating” example above), if you worked at a nuclear power plant it would be necessary to assume the opposite was true - otherwise it would be impossible to build nuclear reactors. Likewise, a good fundy astronomer knows that the correct date of the universe is about 10,000 years at most, but must be able to examine galaxies millions of light-years away and explain them according to the secular model of cosmology. Being able to hold two (or more) sets of mutually exclusive thoughts at once is extremely beneficial to the up-and-coming fundy on the internet. Remember, something might be “true” while you’re at work or sitting an exam, but it’s still completely wrong, and you should switch back to the “Christian Compartment” in your brain whenever possible. Wilful ignorance Ignorance is bliss, and what is more blissful than reading the Word Of God? You will often find yourself accused of this “crime”, but why should you waste time trying to learn how the unbelievers lie to themselves? You don’t need to read a book on evolution to know that it is wrong. You don’t need to read a book about the so-called Big Bang to know that it is a delusion. It is the atheists who are wildly ignorant for not reading the Bible! Sure, many of them say they have read it, but this is clearly a lie - if they’ ve read it, how come they don’t believe it? Don’t waste your precious time trying to get to grips with their overly-complicated theories, when you have a much simpler theory that you already know is true. Conclusion There you have it - Fundy Think For Beginners. All you need to do now is decide how to sign off your devastating arguments. There is classic arrogant abuse, such as “Ha ha ha what an idiot! God made it all! Get an education.”; or patronising the opponent - “I’ll pray that God opens your closed mind and eyes”; a selection of obscure Bible verses, maybe; and finally, the ever popular subtle threats of hellfire - “Well, I’ve told you the Truth, I only hope you like it HOT after you die”. Don’t forget what you’ve learned : return a week later and post exactly the same assertions that you started with. Well...you made it this far..so now the experts will teach you how to identify a cult.. In Fundie Think For beginners, you got a glimpse of what the mentality involved is all about..now  word from the Pro's.. Carl Sagans Baloney Detection Kit Based on the book “The Demon Haunted World: Science as a candle in the dark” published by Headline 1996. The following are suggested as tools for testing arguments and detecting fallacious or fraudulent arguments: Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view. Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no “authorities”). Spin more than one hypothesis - don’t simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy. Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. Quantify, wherever possible. If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work. “Occam’s razor” - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler. Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result? Additional issues are Conduct control experiments - especially “double blind” experiments where the person taking measurements is not aware of the test and control subjects. Check for confounding factors - separate the variables. Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument. Argument from “authority”. Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an “unfavourable” decision). Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence). Special pleading (typically referring to god’s will). Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased). Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses). Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes). Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!) Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not “proved”). Non sequitur - “it does not follow” - the logic falls down. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - “it happened after so it was caused by” - confusion of cause and effect. Meaningless question (“what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?). Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the “other side” look worse than it really is). Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle (“why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?”). Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile). Confusion of correlation and causation. Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack.. Suppressed evidence or half-truths. Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as “police action” to get around limitations on Presidential powers. “An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public” Above all - read the book! Haven't had enough yet...? Not convinced..? Here are the 8 earmarks of a cult..Keep in mind that the following  marks, are not confined to religions..In principle, the techniques can be found "in principle" in government, schools, the media large corporations the military etc.. Eight Marks of a Mind-Control Cult by Randall Watters Brainwashing has become almost a household word in the last two decades or so. In 1961, Robert J. Lifton wrote the definitive book on the subject, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, after studying the effects of mind control on American prisoners of war under the Communist Chinese. Lifton outlines eight major factors that can be used to identify whether a group is a destructive cult or not. Any authoritarian religion should be held up to the light in order to determine just how destructive their influence is on their members. Judge for yourselves. Milieu Control “Milieu” is a French word meaning “surroundings; environment.” Cults are able to control the environment around their recruits in a number of ways, but almost always using a form of isolation. Recruits can be physically separated from society, or they can be warned under threat of punishment to stay away from the world’s educational media, especially when it might provoke critical thinking. Any books, movies or testimonies of ex-members of the group, or even anyone critical of the group in any way are to be avoided. Information is carefully kept on each recruit by the mother organization. All are watched, lest they fall behind or get too far ahead of the thinking of the organization. Because it appears that the organization knows so much about everything and everyone, they appear omniscient in the eyes of the recruits. Mystical Manipulation In religious cults, God is ever-present in the workings of the organization. If a person leaves for any reason, accidents or ill-will that may befall them are always attributed to God’s punishment on them. For the faithful, the angels are always said to be working, and stories circulate about how God is truly doing marvelous things among them, because they are “the truth.” The organization is therefore given a certain “mystique” that is quite alluring to the new recruit. Demand for Purity The world is depicted as black and white, with little room for making personal decisions based on a trained conscience. One’s conduct is modeled after the ideology of the group, as taught in its literature. People and organizations are pictured as either good or evil, depending on their relationship to the cult. Universal tendencies of guilt and shame are used to control individuals, even after they leave. There is great difficulty in understanding the complexities of human morality, since everything is polarized and oversimplified. All things classified as evil are to be avoided, and purity is attainable through immersion into the cult’s ideology. The Cult of Confession Serious sins (as defined by the organization) are to be confessed immediately. The members are to be reported if found walking contrary to the rules. There is often a tendency to derive pleasure from self-degradation through confession. This occurs when all must confess their sins before each other regularly, creating an intense kind of “oneness” within the group. It also allows leaders from within to exercise authority over the weaker ones, using their “sins” as a whip to lead them on. The “Sacred Science” The cult’s ideology becomes the ultimate moral vision for the ordering of human existence. The ideology is too “sacred” to call into question, and a reverence is demanded for the leadership. The cult’s ideology makes an exaggerated claim for possessing airtight logic, making it appear as absolute truth with no contradictions. Such an attractive system offers security. Loading the Language Lifton explains the prolific use of “thought-terminating cliches,” expressions or words that are designed to end the conversation or controversy. We are all familiar with the use of the cliches “capitalist” and “imperialist,” as used by antiwar demonstrators in the 60’s. Such cliches are easily memorized and readily expressed. They are called the “language of non-thought,” since the discussion is terminated, not allowing further consideration. In the Watchtower, for instance, expressions such as “the truth”, the “mother organization”, the “new system”, “apostates” and “worldly” carry with them a judgment on outsiders, leaving them unworthy of further consideration. Doctrine Over Person Human experience is subordinated to doctrine, no matter how profound or contradictory such experiences seem. The history of the cult is altered to fit their doctrinal logic. The person is only valuable insomuch as they conform to the role models of the cult. Commonsense perceptions are disregarded if they are hostile to the cult’s ideology. Dispensing of Existence The cult decides who has the “right” to exist and who does not. They decide who will perish in the final battle of good over evil. The leaders decide which history books are accurate and which are biased. Families can be cut off and outsiders can be deceived, for they are not fit to exist!.. Wait,...there is more..thought reform..!!! How Thought Reform works by the late Margaret Thaler Singer, Ph. D. Terminology note: Today Mind control or brainwashing in academia is commonly referred to as coercive persuasion, coercive psychological systems or coercive influence. The short description below comes from Dr. Margaret Singer professor emeritus at the University of California at Berkeley the acknowledged leading authority in the world on mind control and cults. This document, in substance, was presented to the U.S. Supreme Court as an educational Appendix on coercive psychological systems in the case Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology 89-1367 and 89-1361. The Wollersheim case was being considered related to issues involving abuse in this area. Coercion is defined as, “to restrain or constrain by force...” Legally it often implies the use of physical force or physical or legal threat. This traditional concept of coercion is far better understood than the technological concepts of “coercive persuasion” which are effective restraining, impairing, or compelling through the gradual application of psychological forces. A coercive persuasion program is a behavioral change technology applied to cause the “learning” and “adoption” of a set of behaviors or an ideology under certain conditions. It is distinguished from other forms of benign social learning or peaceful persuasion by the conditions under which it is conducted and by the techniques of environmental and interpersonal manipulation employed to suppress particular behaviors and to train others. Over time, coercive persuasion, a psychological force akin in some ways to our legal concepts of undue influence, can be even more effective than pain, torture, drugs, and use of physical force and legal threats. The Korean War “Manchurian Candidate” misconception of the need for suggestibility-increasing drugs, and physical pain and torture, to effect thought reform, is generally associated with the old concepts and models of brainwashing. Today, they are not necessary for a coercive persuasion program to be effective. With drugs, physical pain, torture, or even a physically coercive threat, you can often temporarily make someone do something against their will. You can even make them do something they hate or they really did not like or want to do at the time. They do it, but their attitude is not changed. This is much different and far less devastating than that which you are able to achieve with the improvements of coercive persuasion. With coercive persuasion you can change people’s attitudes without their knowledge and volition. You can create new “attitudes” where they will do things willingly which they formerly may have detested, things which previously only torture, physical pain, or drugs could have coerced them to do. The advances in the extreme anxiety and emotional stress production technologies found in coercive persuasion supersede old style coercion that focuses on pain, torture, drugs, or threat in that these older systems do not change attitude so that subjects follow orders “willingly.” Coercive persuasion changes both attitude and behavior, not just behavior. THE PURPOSES AND TACTICS OF COERCIVE PERSUASION Coercive persuasion or thought reform as it is sometimes known, is best understood as a coordinated system of graduated coercive influence and behavior control designed to deceptively and surreptitiously manipulate and influence individuals, usually in a group setting, in order for the originators of the program to profit in some way, normally financially or politically. The essential strategy used by those operating such programs is to systematically select, sequence and coordinate numerous coercive persuasion tactics over continuous periods of time. There are seven main tactic types found in various combinations in a coercive persuasion program. A coercive persuasion program can still be quite effective without the presence of ALL seven of these tactic types. TACTIC 1. The individual is prepared for thought reform through increased suggestibility and/or “softening up,” specifically through hypnotic or other suggestibility-increasing techniques such as: A. Extended audio, visual, verbal, or tactile fixation drills; B. Excessive exact repetition of routine activities; C. Decreased sleep; D. Nutritional restriction. TACTIC 2. Using rewards and punishments, efforts are made to establish considerable control over a person’s social environment, time, and sources of social support. Social isolation is promoted. Contact with family and friends is abridged, as is contact with persons who do not share group-approved attitudes. Economic and other dependence on the group is fostered. (In the forerunner to coercive persuasion, brainwashing, this was rather easy to achieve through simple imprisonment.) TACTIC 3. Disconfirming information and nonsupporting opinions are prohibited in group communication. Rules exist about permissible topics to discuss with outsiders. Communication is highly controlled. An “in-group” language is usually constructed. TACTIC 4. Frequent and intense attempts are made to cause a person to re-evaluate the most central aspects of his or her experience of self and prior conduct in negative ways. Efforts are designed to destabilize and undermine the subject’s basic consciousness, reality awareness, world view, emotional control, and defense mechanisms as well as getting them to reinterpret their life’s history, and adopt a new version of causality. TACTIC 5. Intense and frequent attempts are made to undermine a person’s confidence in himself and his judgment, creating a sense of powerlessness. TACTIC 6. Nonphysical punishments are used such as intense humiliation, loss of privilege, social isolation, social status changes, intense guilt, anxiety, manipulation and other techniques for creating strong aversive emotional arousals, etc. TACTIC 7. Certain secular psychological threats [force] are used or are present: That failure to adopt the approved attitude, belief, or consequent behavior will lead to severe punishment or dire consequence, (e.g. physical or mental illness, the reappearance of a prior physical illness, drug dependence, economic collapse, social failure, divorce, disintegration, failure to find a mate, etc.). Another set of criteria has to do with defining other common elements of mind control systems. If most of Robert Jay Lifton’s eight point model of thought reform is being used in a cultic organization, it is most likely a dangerous and destructive cult. These eight points follow: Robert Jay Lifton’s Eight Point Model of Thought Reform ENVIRONMENT CONTROL. Limitation of many/all forms of communication with those outside the group. Books, magazines, letters and visits with friends and family are taboo. “Come out and be separate!” 2. MYSTICAL MANIPULATION. The potential convert to the group becomes convinced of the higher purpose and special calling of the group through a profound encounter/experience, for example, through an alleged miracle or prophetic word of those in the group. 3. DEMAND FOR PURITY. An explicit goal of the group is to bring about some kind of change, whether it be on a global, social, or personal level. “Perfection is possible if one stays with the group and is committed.” 4. CULT OF CONFESSION. The unhealthy practice of self disclosure to members in the group. Often in the context of a public gathering in the group, admitting past sins and imperfections, even doubts about the group and critical thoughts about the integrity of the leaders. 5. SACRED SCIENCE. The group’s perspective is absolutely true and completely adequate to explain EVERYTHING. The doctrine is not subject to amendments or question. ABSOLUTE conformity to the doctrine is required. 6. LOADED LANGUAGE. A new vocabulary emerges within the context of the group. Group members “think” within the very abstract and narrow parameters of the group’s doctrine. The terminology sufficiently stops members from thinking critically by reinforcing a “black and white” mentality. Loaded terms and clichés prejudice thinking. 7. DOCTRINE OVER PERSON. Pre-group experience and group experience are narrowly and decisively interpreted through the absolute doctrine, even when experience contradicts the doctrine. 8. DISPENSING OF EXISTENCE. Salvation is possible only in the group. Those who leave the group are doomed. COERCIVE PERSUASION IS NOT PEACEFUL PERSUASION Programs identified with the above-listed seven tactics have in common the elements of attempting to greatly modify a person’s self- concept, perceptions of reality, and interpersonal relations. When successful in inducing these changes, coercive thought reform programs also, among other things, create the potential forces necessary for exercising undue influence over a person’s independent decision-making ability, and even for turning the individual into a deployable agent for the organization’s benefit without the individual’s meaningful knowledge or consent. Coercive persuasion programs are effective because individuals experiencing the deliberately planned severe stresses they generate can only reduce the pressures by accepting the system or adopting the behaviors being promulgated by the purveyors of the coercion program. The relationship between the person and the coercive persuasion tactics are DYNAMIC in that while the force of the pressures, rewards, and punishments brought to bear on the person are considerable, they do not lead to a stable, meaningfully self-chosen reorganization of beliefs or attitudes. Rather, they lead to a sort of coerced compliance and a situationally required elaborate rationalization, for the new conduct. Once again, in order to maintain the new attitudes or “decisions,” sustain the rationalization, and continue to unduly influence a person’s behavior over time, coercive tactics must be more or less continuously applied. A fiery, “hell and damnation” guilt-ridden sermon from the pulpit or several hours with a high-pressure salesman or other single instances of the so-called peaceful persuasions do not constitute the “necessary chords and orchestration” of a SEQUENCED, continuous, coordinated, and carefully selected program of surreptitious coercion, as found in a comprehensive program of “coercive persuasion.” Truly peaceful religious persuasion practices would never attempt to force, compel and dominate the free wills or minds of its members through coercive behavioral techniques or covert hypnotism. They would have no difficulty coexisting peacefully with U.S. laws meant to protect the public from such practices. Looking like peaceful persuasion is precisely what makes coercive persuasion less likely to attract attention or to mobilize opposition. It is also part of what makes it such a devastating control technology. Victims of coercive persuasion have: no signs of physical abuse, convincing rationalizations for the radical or abrupt changes in their behavior, a convincing “sincerity, and they have been changed so gradually that they don’t oppose it because they usually aren’t even aware of it. Deciding if coercive persuasion was used requires case-by-case careful analysis of all the influence techniques used and how they were applied. By focusing on the medium of delivery and process used, not the message, and on the critical differences, not the coincidental similarities, which system was used becomes clear. The Influence Continuum helps make the difference between peaceful persuasion and coercive persuasion easier to distinguish. VARIABLES Not all tactics used in a coercive persuasion type environment will always be coercive. Some tactics of an innocuous or cloaking nature will be mixed in. Not all individuals exposed to coercive persuasion or thought reform programs are effectively coerced into becoming participants. How individual suggestibility, psychological and physiological strengths, weakness, and differences react with the degree of severity, continuity, and comprehensiveness in which the various tactics and content of a coercive persuasion program are applied, determine the program’s effectiveness and/or the degree of severity of damage caused to its victims. For example, in United States v. Lee 455 U.S. 252, 257-258 (1982), the California Supreme Court found that “when a person is subjected to coercive persuasion without his knowledge or consent... [he may] develop serious and sometimes irreversible physical and psychiatric disorders, up to and including schizophrenia, self-mutilation, and suicide.” WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA OF A COERCIVE PERSUASION PROGRAM? A). Determine if the subject individual held enough knowledge and volitional capacity to make the decision to change his or her ideas or beliefs. B). Determine whether that individual did, in fact, adopt, affirm, or reject those ideas or beliefs on his own. C). Then, if necessary, all that should be examined is the behavioral processes used, not ideological content. One needs to examine only the behavioral processes used in their “conversion.” Each alleged coercive persuasion situation should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The characteristics of coercive persuasion programs are severe, well-understood, and they are not accidental. COERCIVE PERSUASION IS NOT VOLUNTARY, PEACEFUL, RELIGIOUS PRACTICE OR CENTRAL TO ANY BONA FIDE RELIGION. Coercive persuasion is not a religious practice, it is a control technology. It is not a belief or ideology, it is a technological process. As a process, it can be examined by experts on its technology completely separate from any idea or belief content, similar to examining the technical process of hypnotic induction distinct from the meaning or value of the post-hypnotic suggestions. Examining processes in this manner can not violate First Amendment religious protections. Coercive persuasion is antithetical to the First Amendment. It is the unfair manipulation of other’s biological and psychological weaknesses and susceptibilities. It is a psychological force technology, not of a free society, but of a criminal or totalitarian society. It is certainly not a spiritual or religious technology. Any organization using coercive persuasion on its members as a central practice that also claims to be a religion is turning the sanctuary of the First Amendment into a fortress for psychological assault. It is a contradiction of terms and should be “disestablished.” Coercive persuasion is a subtle, compelling psychological force which attacks an even more fundamental and important freedom than our “freedom of religion.” Its reprehensibility and danger is that it attacks our self-determinism and free will, our most fundamental constitutional freedoms. Dr. Margaret T. Singer died on Nov. 23. Dr. Singer was one of the leading experts on thought reform and the dynamics of destructive cults. She counseled too many former members to count. Her books (Cults in Our Midst and Crazy Therapies) helped countless others to understand the process of cult behavior and the recovery process coming out of the cults. Her tenacity and sense of humor were unforgettable. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Comments, questions, and suggestions: email us! reFOCUS, P.O. Box 2180, Flagler Beach, FL 32136 904-439-7541 Web site: http://www.refocus.org The reFOCUS Board of Directors consists of: Carol Giambalvo, President/Secretary Rick Seelhoff, Vice President Mary Taylor, Treasurer David Clark Maureen Griffo Nancy Miquelon Vanessa Weber Advisor: Madeleine Tobias Email: torefocus@aol.com or refocuscarol@worldnet.att.net