--- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: (snip) > As for cults, my definition tends more towards, "A cult > is any organization in which its members perceive any > criticism of the organization as criticism of them per- > sonally, or even as an 'attack' against them personally, > and then react angrily to that criticism." This would > hold true IMO for spiritual organizations, corporations, > political parties, whatever. It's the *behavior* that > defines cultism, not the nature of the org. > > It's the overidentification with the group and the over- > reaction to criticism that does it for me, and that > defines a group as a cult and its members as cultists. > That and certain classically cult behavioral patterns > like playing "shoot the messenger" and attacking the > critic while ignoring the criticisms. > > By that standard, there are a few people on FFL who > are definitely cultists. There are also some TM > practitioners on this forum who are not, but we rarely > hear from them. Mainly it's the cultists who feel the > need to follow up any criticism with samskaric > attachment/aversion behavior and attack the critics.
Some people, Barry (not you, of course), simply dislike misrepresentations, no matter what they're about. The proof is that most of the people you would characterize as "cultists" here don't argue with accurate criticisms or attack those who made them. Some of these "cultists" even have their *own* criticisms of the TMO/MMY. And typically these "cultists" do indeed address the criticisms. See my posts to Michael concerning Candy Crowley, just for one recent example. > Whatever floats their boats, I guess. I just don't > understand how they believe that they're presenting > a positive view of the organization they're "protecting" > or the technique it sells. If simple criticism can push > their buttons this badly after 30-40 years of practicing > it, then the technique really doesn't do much of anything > useful at all, does it? This, of course, is a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" type question, based on false premises: that when we correct a misrepresentation it's because we're trying to "sell" TM or the TMO, and/or that we do it because we've had our buttons pushed. It's also a great example of Barry's tendency to project (hypocrisy is another term for it). As we've seen recently, Barry's buttons are frequently very severely pushed when he is criticized; and when that happens he readily shoots the messenger, as well as ignoring the criticisms even when--or *especially* when--they're bang-on accurate. Yes, here I'm "shooting the messenger" myself (after addressing his criticisms). As I've said before, a messenger who deliberately brings a false message *should* be shot. That's why Barry gets shot so often.
