Orphan Crow: Your last statement does highlight again what a subjective analysis is and what an objective analysis is. Again, we may have different definitions for those two terms, and I provided you with the definition that I am using, which again are recognized definitions.
I used the analogy of weight to define my definition of objective and subjective information. A scale shows an actual fact which is objective, no reasonable person can dispute what the scale says. Though, the perception of if something is heavy or not, depends on a person's objective observation of the item.
You wrote this:
Richard, why do you need a peer reviewed article that specifically states that? Are you not capable of rationally analyzing this on your own? Can you not access a list of characteristics of a high control group and compare it to the WTS?
It is a simple exercise that does not require peer reviewed articles that directly speak of the WTS. There is plenty of information from recognized mental health professionals that lay down the parameters of what defines a high control group. You are fully capable of inserting "characteristics of a high control group" into your search engine and rationally choosing those sources that are attached to a mental health professional that has at least a PHD from a credible university.
The bold is my emphasis. You state that one has to take the information and decide if a group falls under the parameters of a high control organization. So an analysis has to be made of the parameters and the evidence that is being presented of the organization. But the key word that you used is "analyzing" that requires a person to take their own perceptions of a matter into account.
And here is a definition of analysis:
detailed examination of the elements or structure of something, typically as a basis for discussion or interpretation.
And yes you are right analysis requires a detailed examination, but notice the last word in the definition that is interpertation. Interperterpation is therefor defined as:
to conceive in the light of individual belief, judgment, or circumstance
So again it is subjective.
That is why mental health counseling can be such a tricky issue. We saw this in a posting just recently where a poster had an issue with the fact that their counselor feels that leaving Watchtower is a personal choice, I am sorry for not remembering the exact term that was used. But the point that I am making is, that if you put into a room 100 psychiatrist, psychologist and mental health counselors, and gave them the exact same scenario, you would probably get a wide variety of opinions as to the cause of it. There would certainly be some overlap in thought and diagnosis but you wouldn't get a universal consensus on all of the claims.
And again like I said earlier. If it would be a generally accepted fact in the mental health profession that Watchtower is a high control organization, there would be people in that profession who would say so in a journal article that has been reviewed and accepted by their colleagues.
Again I am not disputing that you and many other people feel that Watchtower is such, but again that is your opinion and you and everyone else is entitled to that. I never disputed that you and others may have been hurt by Watchtower. I never disputed that you may have felt that you were controlled by Watchtower. But those are your opinions and your feelings. I nor no one else can take those away from you, but you cannot claim that your opinion and your feelings are facts for anyone other than you, those are your facts those may not be the facts for someone else.
