ROBERT ANTON ("Bob") WILSON
"In Doubt We Trust" Cults, Religions and B.S. in General":
"...There are two clear-cut and empirical lines between a 'cult' and a 'religion': (a) membership (voters) and (b) bank account, (b) being a function of (a). If a group has enough members to influence elections, it will also have a large bank account, and these two factors will guarantee that the politicians, the cops and the corporate media will treat it with respect, as a 'religion'. With few members and little money, the same group could be called a 'cult' and treated accordingly, even to the extent of toasting, roasting and charbroiling, as in Waco.
"This line remains obvious and visible to all observers; the only problem arises when people try to draw a less 'materialistic', more metaphysical distinction between one gang of True Believers and another. Materialistic questions can be answered - e.g., 'Does that match-box have any matches left in it?' Metaphysical questions about 'mind control' or any other immeasurable 'entity' or 'essense' cannot be answered, and the best that can be said of them is that arguing about them has provided a certain amount of intellectual entertainment, or combat, for a few thousand years, for those who enjoy that kind of passtime. Sort of like chess, you know.
"I have no commitment to materialism as a philosophy which pretends to explain everything (which no correlation of words can ever do, and a philosophy is never more than a correlation of words). But, restricting myself to the 'materialistic'/scientific method of asking questions that have definite experiential answers, I observe no difference in operation between 'cults' or 'religions'. Catholic nuns and priests vowing celibacy seem no weirder or less weird than Heaven's Gate members who also make that choice. Mormon extraterrestrial cosmology seems as goofy as Scientology, etc. Religions and cults all use the same techniques of brain damage or 'mind control', i.e., they all instill B.S. - Belief Systems..."
"In Doubt We Trust" Cults, Religions and B.S. in General":
"...There are two clear-cut and empirical lines between a 'cult' and a 'religion': (a) membership (voters) and (b) bank account, (b) being a function of (a). If a group has enough members to influence elections, it will also have a large bank account, and these two factors will guarantee that the politicians, the cops and the corporate media will treat it with respect, as a 'religion'. With few members and little money, the same group could be called a 'cult' and treated accordingly, even to the extent of toasting, roasting and charbroiling, as in Waco.
"This line remains obvious and visible to all observers; the only problem arises when people try to draw a less 'materialistic', more metaphysical distinction between one gang of True Believers and another. Materialistic questions can be answered - e.g., 'Does that match-box have any matches left in it?' Metaphysical questions about 'mind control' or any other immeasurable 'entity' or 'essense' cannot be answered, and the best that can be said of them is that arguing about them has provided a certain amount of intellectual entertainment, or combat, for a few thousand years, for those who enjoy that kind of passtime. Sort of like chess, you know.
"I have no commitment to materialism as a philosophy which pretends to explain everything (which no correlation of words can ever do, and a philosophy is never more than a correlation of words). But, restricting myself to the 'materialistic'/scientific method of asking questions that have definite experiential answers, I observe no difference in operation between 'cults' or 'religions'. Catholic nuns and priests vowing celibacy seem no weirder or less weird than Heaven's Gate members who also make that choice. Mormon extraterrestrial cosmology seems as goofy as Scientology, etc. Religions and cults all use the same techniques of brain damage or 'mind control', i.e., they all instill B.S. - Belief Systems..."
Upvote
0