My comment on Cecil’s column on brainwashing was closed after receiving one smartass response.
My comment was accurate and straightforward. Why was it closed? Especially since this thread has now been opened on the same topic and it says, in effect, the same thing that I did.
WTF??
Um, maybe because your comment had nothing whatsoever to do with the actual column, but more accurately served as a way for you to say, “Hey, you know who else does that? The church!”.
I’m sure they wouldn’t have a problem with you starting a new thread about how you feel religion affects young people, but that wasn’t the way to go about it.
Your OP labeled all organized religions as brainwashing cults. There was nothing accurate about it, and the response you got was not “smartass.”
The other OP merely pointed out that Jim Jones served Flavor Aid, not the Kool-Aid that always features in that story.
How can you think that the other OP was saying anything even close to what you said? :dubious: The only thing your OP had in common with the other OP is that you used the word “cult” and the other mentioned a famous cult leader.
Well, that’s just asinine. In most cases? That’s why the world is chock-a-block with murderous methodists and homicidal hutterites, I suppose.
It would be less insane to suggest that the various national armed forces are “the most successful brainwashers throughout history.” After all, they use all the signature techniques – elimination of individual traits, breaking down character through ritual abuse, etc. And golly, most folks who go through the program are willing to kill other people over the nonsense they’ve been indoctrinated with.
(“Insane,” in this context, is a matter of degree.)
More succinctly, you’re a dick.
The column was on brainwashing. Organized religions brainwash their members and I commented on the degree they do it. And on the fact that Cecil omitted religions from his column and I was sorta curious why.
If you had the ability to read, you might have noticed that Cecil points out that “brainwashing” and “indoctrination” aren’t, as many people mistakenly believe, interchangable terms.
Brainwashing is distinct from simple indoctrination in that it involves rendering the subject psychologically vulnerable through enforced isolation, drugs, starvation, sleep deprivation, torture, and Skinnerist/Pavlovian behaviour modification.
Simply presenting people with concepts can not in anyway be construed as brainwashing, no matter how we feel about the truth and utility of the concepts. Does brainwashing take place at Young Republican meetings? It doesn’t matter how many people come out of the hall glassy-eyed and regurgitating dogmatic axioms that are arguably counterfactual – they haven’t been brainwashed. (Same goes for labour rallies, of course.)
I’m no great booster of organized religion, but it’s fucking stupid to suggest that they’re brainwashing people.
I’m guessing it’s because, as with everything I’ve seen you write, it was utterly moronic and made assertions without any support. I know you take your own views as High Truths - presumably because you don’t want to have to explore or justify them - but the rest of us don’t.
That, and the ultrareligious SDMB cabal is repressing you.
I think that’s the problem right there…
Are you so fearful of the moderator in question that you can’t inquire about it in an email? What does posting this in the Pit really bring you? We’re not going to pat you on the back and go, “Whoa, man, nice rant. You really zinged [mod] there.” Sorry to break it to you.
Be a big boy. Use the email feature. Stop wasting our time (and the mods).
/S
Wow, you’re seriously wondering why that was closed? Your suggestion, that religion=brainwashing, dilutes the term to nothingness. If that’s the case, then capitalism, communism, pacifism, patriotism, the Golden Rule, and any other value set that children may learn from their parents qualifies as brainwashing. It’s a ridiculous definition.
That said, your post asserted the ridiculous definition, and it looked to me like an explicit attack on organized religion. That’s great debates material.
Daniel
I was raised in a Methodist church. My uncle was a minister. When I reached the age of reason, I attended confirmation classes. When the classes were complete, I declined to be confirmed, explaining that I could not make the affirmation because I did not believe it.
And that was that.
The reasons why people accept religion are complex and – from an atheistic POV – not fully understood.
Your argument, Clothahump, was not only facile but also patently untrue. And the tone was inappropriate for the forum.
No doubt, that’s why it was closed.
Regardless of how obvious the closing is to others, is it too much to ask for the mod closing it to state why in the thread? Isn’t that SOP?
Um, Shad …This is the place. Sorry to break it to you.
There was no indication as to who closed the thread. There was no attempt to zing a mod. It was a sincere question as to why the thread was closed. And from the main page, it specifically says
(bolding mine).
Alright, we admit it. Your dumbass thread is in the right place.
As is your dumbass response.
I like Easter Service… it’s better than Cats… I’m going to see it again and again…
It’s amusing that you complain about galt’s accurate and straightforward comment.
Your original comment was wrong and biased. After several posters point this out and you ignore them, we get bored of your moronity.
I’d still like to see a mod or administrator ‘explain’ the closure, though.
Nothing like the OP asking for an official imprimatur on his cretinism, when it comes to entertainment value. What will they say?
“Because you’re as dumb as a post. When can we expect your renewal, sugar?”
You forgot “enemas,” LHoD. There are plenty of times when a nice soapy enema qualifies as brainwashing.
Everytime Clothahump posts about religion, I understand exactly how Polycarp feels when he sees a post by a young-Earth creationist.