Cultspotting

From a young age I have been interested in human behaviour, and the way it seems to endlessly perplex me. Cults are particularly facinating, especially how people in them can become so detatched from our world and refuse rational logic. It is a subject I have some degree of personal experience in, which you may guess from the tone of this essay. Understandably I won't identify people, and talk only in general terms. I am not just writing this randomly, I did plan to write it for my epq which is basically just a really long essay for an AS level. Without further ado I will begin.

Cults feature surprisingly frequently in the news, despite their almost inherent secrecy and closed nature. This is mostly due to the behaviour of their members, which appears to us as completely uncomprehensible. However, once we understand a few things about the mindset, we can finally understand why. First we must define what a cult is. A quick search on google sums it up well
1. A system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.
2. A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.

The definition suggests the definition for cults is quite relative, ie people who just hold different views to ours. However, usually a cult is a group who's views don't stand to reason, or they refuse to even discuss it. Cults tend to believe things that appear stupidly bizzare to us and it's a wonder that anyone can accept it. Often the word brainwashing is thrown around, and images of strange military experiments spring to mind. Unfortunately in cults it is rarely so overt, mostly due to the fact the members and leadership genuinely believe that worldview.

How does the brainwashing happen? Cult members are almost always open minded but most of all, not rationally critical of new ideas. If a prospective member spends enough time around people who believe the crazy views, they will begin to accept it. Only the most rigidly stuborn and critical people will not yield to the views that surround them all the time. An analogy can be seen in the world around, we more frequently yield to popular opinion than we would like to admit. With cults there is more to it however, as their members are often exposed to the more mainstream view too. So how do they choose the more irrational view over the mainstream view?

Almost always a cult is headed or was originally headed by a single, usually eccentric man (I will for simplicity presume it is always a male head, although of course it is not always). The man usually fits into a specific archetype, giving the appearance of knowing all but still remaining elusive. This serves many purposes, firstly it means his answers aren't automatically questioned because they are hard to define and secondly because it means people have to keep going back to him for more answers. A valid question at this point would be: how does someone ever get to be in this position of intellectual veneration? As with most human behaviour it's a gradual thing, the 'go to' guy for one person quickly becomes the go to guy for everyone. I'm sure you've noticed this behaviour before, particularly when you were younger, there were always those groups where one person was practically worshiped. I guess its a similar mechanic. Another possible reason would be if someone just attracts only the kind of person you could describe as sheep or natural followers.

How does a cult then maintain its members? Surely the small amount of doubt would build up? This is where it gets interesting, and from personal experience I have noticed several mechanics going on. One links back to the mans illusive nature. If someone gives illusive answers, it means the person has to project their own meaning on it. For example the man may say indirectly suggest that a certain practice is bad (for whatever reason). From what the person does he can judge their attitude and more effective control them (consciously or subconsciously). Furthermore, he can later contradict himself without actually making himself seem unreliable, the person then blames themselves for their obvious incorrect interpretation. This serves to bring people into line as it makes the person feel guilty. Also it makes the person further doubt their own judgement, and instead rely on his.

Another method used is fear. Cults tend to demonise their enemies (example Scientology and psychiatry), which weakens their arguments and draws them closer to the protection of the cult. Secondly and something which is almost the acid test of a cult is ex-communication. The threat of ex-communication in a cult is a scary one for many reasons. Firstly you'd no longer be in the group of people that are constantly portrayed as right, implying you would be wrong. The implications of this are usually magnified by religious ideas, eg only the cult will go to heaven. The other thing is the self contained nature of cults means that a member's whole world is contained with it, to leave would be a catastrophic event for them. It's like for us to loose all our friends and lifestyle all at once. This leads me full circle back to the definition; the danger in cults is that someone can get so trapped in it that they will put up with atrocities and obvious injustices. Which paradoxically leads me to define a dangerous cult (one you should get out of) as one you can't get out of.