this is part ii of a series of posts i plan to make.
i will write my comments of steven hassan's latest book, freedom of mind: helping loved ones leave controlling people, cults, and beliefs.. you can purchase the book in amazon.com, there is a kindle version which is very handy since you can read it wherever you have internet connection, or if you have an iphone, an ipad, android phone, etc.. you can get it here:.
http://www.amazon.com/freedom-mind-helping-controlling-beliefs-ebook/dp/b008haiwiw/ref=sr_1_1_bnp_1_kin?ie=utf8&qid=1384750710&sr=8-1&keywords=freedom+of+mind.
I have heard of the Zimbardo and Milgram expts. They both made good points about how people can be influenced and manipulated. Did Ch2 talk how ones from the experiments recovered, and how the recovery process was executed?
Probably not, I kind of just want answers. I can be a little impetuous.
Kate xx
i think to the benefit of all, i will write my comments of steven hassan's latest book, freedom of mind: helping loved ones leave controlling people, cults, and beliefs.. you can purchase the book in amazon.com, there is a kindle version which is very handy since you can read it wherever you have internet connection, or if you have an iphone, an ipad, android phone, etc.. you can get it here: .
http://www.amazon.com/freedom-mind-helping-controlling-beliefs-ebook/dp/b008haiwiw/ref=sr_1_1_bnp_1_kin?ie=utf8&qid=1384750710&sr=8-1&keywords=freedom+of+mind.
the first chapter talks about determining whether a particular group is a cult.. "destructive cults are distinguished by their use of deception and extreme influence.".
If you need to show the book to someone - the first one.-ILT
Goodpoint. I need to be delicate. I have bought Combating Mind Control. ILT, please continue with your review, I may also buy "Freedom of Mind" if I think you have found it useful. I am going to check your next thread on Ch2.
Thanks very much-Kate xx
i have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
Think of a child's book with a picture and a word on each page, dog, cat, cow, horse, rabbit. How could we learn any other way? Then we have to unlearn it with evolution.-Xant
That's a good point too. But as I only just posted, I still think Dawkin's is paranoid about superstitous people, and putting Platoism in the chapter was a motive of his to highlight empty philisophies and how dangerous they are.
In chemistry, we have to unlearn things in a similar way, it's not big deal everyone gets it. They don't struggle with essentialism, or Platoism. Why would anyone struggle in biology?
But thanks for carifying the point. Kate xx
i have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
Superstitious people all over the world are the ones inventing gods and demons in their own imaginations.- cofty
Thanks cofty. Another light bulb moment. That's what the Platoism and essentialism was about in Ch 2. Dawkins is paranoid superstitious people are taking over the world.
Seriously, my daughter and her boyfriend are here visiting. They both work hard in full time jobs. They are concerned about rising car insurance, stagnent wages and affordable housing. Their generation are dealing with hard economic circumstances. How well they are educated in evolution is of no concern. Dawkin's is British and more concerned about how evolution is taught in schools and should be regarded a priority.
At least Einstein had an active role in certain issues that plagued society. He campaiged for nuclear disarmament, he was a member of the UN and he even got offered the post of Prime Minister of Israel.
But now, cofty I get his point. - Kate xx
i have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
So Kate any more thoughts on chapter 2? Xant
LOL!, I dont mind where the OP goes, as long as everyone is having fun. Chapter 1 thread is still going strong last I checked. I am impressed that Tammy is reading it too. But I will just emphasise again. I found three interesting points in chapter 2.
The hairpin theory, gene pools and artificial / natural selection.
The point on artificial / natural selection I found somewhat convoluted with lots of irelevant information about dog breeding. I found it boring and I missed the point until Braincleaned highlighted it in a more succinct way. Adam, thinks I missed the point due to low IQ. He can try and intellectually intimidate me as much as he likes. It doesn't really wash with any posters though so I don't mind. Love to you Adam xx
Overall I found it a laborious chapter, but I am bias. In Ch3 I will endeavour to be less bias and give Dawkin's more of a chance to teach me some more new things about evolution that I don't yet know.
Kate xx
i have to say, i am afraid i found this chapter labourious to read in most places.
imo i felt he just wasn't getting to the point.
i don't get why dawkins felt the need to teach me all about platoism, essentialism and rabbits.
I had thought that such lies about Einstein would have been settled by now. KateWild, where do you get such inaccurate information?-Etude
I started a thread about Einstein’s religious beliefs, as Adam quite rightly noted. There were lots of quotes on it, including the fact that Einstien expressed that finer speculation of science springs from religious feeling. So he is saying what caused scientific enquiry for him. It was the same for me. Maybe it's a Jewish thing, he expressed this in 1929 in New York. At this conference apparantly other scientists were saying words to the effect of keeping God out of the lab.
This is in a book called "Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology" by Max Jammer.
Sadly I mistakenly used the word faith instead of religious feeling. This is just semantics, not lies. Both Dawkin's and Einstein bring, religion and faith into science in different ways.
Please read the thread Etude, I am sure you will enjoy it. Thanks Kate xx
if i've got something wrong here, i welcome any corrections in my understanding;.
1. circuit assembly costs are funded by each congregation in the circuit contributing from their kh funds.. 2. donations are requested during the c.a.
program to offset the costs of 'providing' the facilities.. if the c.a.
They need to raise more money for law suits
in context of john 4, the love of god is manifest in that he has sent his only begotten son into the world, that we might live through him.. my questions are:.
where is there any hint of love that would justify the killing of animals for sacrifice, then.
leading to a human sacrifice?.
What does "cover" mean and how exactly does blood cover somebody?-cofty
When a man beats his family so badly, they are covered in blood. God doesn't care, but blood has covered them none the less. When this happens in a religion you believe is loving and kind it makes a mockery of Jesus' blood covering sins. Its even worse when religious leaders hide the DV, and say the family is not submissive.
That's the only way I see how blood covers somebody
Kate xx
i just caught this in an upcoming study article which will be "studied" in the congregations the week of 11/18-24/13:.
he and his wife were elated when their eldest daughter, age ten, told them that she loved her parents, loved the brothers and sisters, and loved jehovah very much.
she said that she wanted to dedicate her life to jehovah and get baptized.
in context of john 4, the love of god is manifest in that he has sent his only begotten son into the world, that we might live through him.. my questions are:.
where is there any hint of love that would justify the killing of animals for sacrifice, then.
leading to a human sacrifice?.
Good point, very sad point as well. I can't see how God can be interested in humans. The bible is not from obviously not from God. Kate xx
