I basically agree but it depends a bit on the fraction of defectors to the faithful. Defectors should be given a proportional saying. When there are many defectors they should be given more space. I think they should be given much space in the case for e.g. Sathya Sai Baba and Jehovah Witnesses because of the many defectors of this group. Besides Wilson forgets to mention that the coterie of the cult leader is small and that only defectors of the coterie have inside information that may give more insight to the cult leader's credibility.Sociologists have found that the number of "vociferous critics" is always very small and that most people that move on had either a good experience or at worst, indifferent. Hence, proportional saying should include those that moved on without having a negative experience.
The disaffected try to understand his past, not necessarily re-construct. Most former followers also blame themselves for being naive and stupid and do not put all the blame on the cult. In many cases, an apostate is just somebody who was so deeply involved that he cannot simply forget and move on.
You may tale responsibility for your actions, but the people in this Forum don't. I may understand why you may have had problems in "moving on" from that Sai Baba, but there is nothing that is stopping these people from doing so, besides an obsessive trait that they have developed, each for his/her own reasons. Most people that want to stop practicing K, do so.
may be atrocity stories then to generate others because there happened to be others who experienced the same. That explanation should be preferred following Ockham's razor. I admit that some newspapers like exaggerated, simplistic and dramatic stories about cults.
Newspapers love hat shit. It sells newspapers.
it is completely crazy and highly offensive to say that such a broad, diverse category of people is unreliable.
How "reliable" can be the testimony of a wife in a divorce proceeding? Reliable may be wrong word, "tainted" would be better.
_Ya.1
