Is the very concept of THE TRUTH the reason cults can exist?

by zen nudist 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  zen nudist

  considering that all availible evidence points to the understanding that everything we KNOW is our own mental inventions, symbols our own minds have made... maps of an implied territory, representations, not substance, how can we be sure of anything that arises in our minds at all? it seems the best we can say is that there is some stability and consistancy to some of the things we experience and some of our beliefs seems useful a lot of the time... but THE TRUTH? what can one use as a standard for THE TRUTH? mostly what people discuss as truths seem to me to be nothing more than experiences seeming to match expectations and hidden ideals. when you experience something that fits what you think should be true, you FEEL something but is a feeling a good measure of TRUTH?

  the bible says the heart is wicked.... many claim to put heart above head, but I find those who do are leading with their ass.

  it seems to me that THE TRUTH is what CON ARTISTS invented to help people become sheep so the shepherds could fleece and lead them to the slaughter with greater ease.... while I can obviously never be sure I am right...I do find many beliefs to be useful myths.
• 

  franklin J

  ...if you want to find any "TRUTH"....remember that it must be universal to all mankind.....the bible is a religious invention by man and it should be the disgarded in this quest. THAT book has caused more bloodshed and UNTRUTHS to be perpetuated than anything else I can think of.

  ...the only TRUTH that I know of for a fact is as stated from a secular philosopher " I think; therefore I am".
• 

  jaredg

  this is from the "Cult Test" 100 questions to answer is you think you might be in a cult.
  

  Item

  14.Dogma, Unquestionable Dogma, and Sacred Science.The cult has lots of it to teach you. Dogma can also be defined as doctrine, beliefs, convictions, teachings, precepts, or tenets. And they are all true, always. No critical questions about the leader, doctrine, or policy are seen as legitimate, "because God gave our leader these teachings, so of course they are absolutely right and infallible. Anybody who criticizes our leader's teachings must be an agent of Satan."

  "Unquestionable dogma" is also called "Sacred Science", which is one of Robert J. Lifton's Eight Conditions of Thought Reform. The cult's "truth" is the absolute truth, sacred and beyond questioning. The cult's laws, rules and regulations are absolutely correct, always, and therefore to be followed automatically.

  There is a reverence demanded for the leadership. They have ALL of the answers, they say, and only to them is given the revelation of "truth". The ultimate moral vision becomes the ultimate science and the person who dares to criticize it is considered immoral, irreverent, and "unscientific".

  more can be found at http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-cult_q0.html#cq_guru_right
• 

  BluesBrother

  considering that all availible evidence points to the understanding that everything we KNOW is our own mental inventions, symbols our own minds have made... maps of an implied territory, representations, not substance, how can we be sure of anything

  That is a scary thought, i did not know that "All evidence" points to that. Was it not Decarte's who said something similar? What do I know? I have never claimed to be clever. BB who was phased by the movie "Truman Show"
• 

  zen nudist

  i did not know that "All evidence" points to that.

  check out http://www.geocities.com/jiohdi/reality1.html
• 

  garybuss

  I think high control groups can be a business or a government and even a personality. I think the only requirement is a purpose. Religion requires theism as it's frame.
• 

  M.J.

  Here are some points from "Releasing the Bonds" by Steven Hassan on "Reality"

  • Every individual has his own sense of reality and is connected to a shared reality with others
  • Our perception of reality is influenced by our inborn characteristics and abilities, psychological development, emotional states, and belief systems.
  • Our view of reality is influenced (positively and negatively) by memories, beliefs, needs, and social influence
  • We all filter and edit the information detected by our senses: we emphasize some things and eliminate others. Otherwise, we would be overwhelmed by a flood of information. In fact, much of the brain?s function is to inhibit incoming information.
  • We can never be 100% certain that our picture of reality is objectively correct
  • We never fully know another person?s reality
  • We are not capable of fully communicating all the things that make up our sense of reality.
  • We can?t assume that what we believe is more than a "constructed" view of reality.
  • Our internal self-talk interprets, and sometimes distorts, our sense of reality
  • We can control some of our inner and outer reality. Total control is impossible, although through discipline (meditation or hypnosis), the mind can develop greater degrees of control.
  • We can?t control all of our reality all the time.
  • No matter how much we improve and work to enhance our sense of what is real, it is always incomplete, imperfect, out of focus, and distorted.
  • The more distorted our sense of reality, the more certain we will be that what we believe is accurate.

  • The more insistent a person is about the accuracy of his or her observations, the more likely it is that his or her sense of reality is distorted.
• 

  NeonMadman

  i did not know that "All evidence" points to that.

  check out http://www.geocities.com/jiohdi/reality1.html

  I don't see "all evidence" on that site, or, really, any evidence at all. What I see is Watchtower-style reasoning: it "could be" that everything we perceive is unreal, and because we assert it to be so, it must be true. What is the "evidence" that what we perceive is not what actually is? This is typical postmodern claptrap: 'nothing is objectively true'. My question is, if we say that nothing is objectively true, are we stating an objective truth?
• 

  funkyderek

  What is the "evidence" that what we perceive is not what actually is? This is typical postmodern claptrap: 'nothing is objectively true'. My question is, if we say that nothing is objectively true, are we stating an objective truth?

  I often come up against arguments that claim there's no objective truth, and therefore all viewpoints are equivalent. I usually counter these arguments by punching the person very hard in the face. When they splutter through their broken teeth "Why the hell did you do that?" I punch them again and continue until they figure it out.
• 

  zen nudist

  I don't see "all evidence" on that site, or, really, any evidence at all. What I see is Watchtower-style reasoning: it "could be" that everything we perceive is unreal, and because we assert it to be so, it must be true. What is the "evidence" that what we perceive is not what actually is? This is typical postmodern claptrap: 'nothing is objectively true'. My question is, if we say that nothing is objectively true, are we stating an objective truth?

  I see nothing in what you are saying to show anything otherwise either

  What is the "evidence" that what we perceive is not what actually is?

  how do we compare and tell what actually is? from all the EVIDENCE what actually is is just mental inventions, dreams...but that is hardly the point you think you are making now is it

  but if you read carefully, you will see I make no such claims, only that the EVIDENCE we have points to everything we KNOW to be within our own minds made by our own minds...not that it is untrue or even inaccurate, I cannot tell that as I have no means to do so.

  The page I refered to does not say that everything is unreal, only that everything we KNOW may be nothing more than a dream, not that it is nothing more than a dream, the conclusion is NOT given as that would imply the very thing you falsely accuse me of doing, namely stating an objective truth, which of course I do not believe to exist....

  but your RANDROID reaction is typical of those who want to silence opinions which do not conform to your view of the world.