Author Topic: Cult deprogramming  (Read 10663 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2016, 07:27:24 PM »
0

It is becoming increasingly tiresome watching people try to hold any sort of discussion with you.

You're the one who told me that you've studied "undue influence" and "manipulation" so well that you can identify it in PUA without impending it's techniques yourself, right?

You're also the one who cut and pasted some material from Margaret Sanger on "coercive persuasion", right?

My really simple argument is that the actions Rick Ross performed, especially kidnapping for hire and twenty-four hour forced confinement HAD BETTER BE prime examples of "undue influence", "manipulation", and "coercive persuasion".   Because if they're not (and FDR Liberated's discussions on the subject imply that they're not), then either those terms are stupid OR they're quite intelligent but you're applying them stupidly.

Free Man

  • FDR Interested
  • *
  • Posts: 43
  • Respect: +99
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2016, 07:40:41 PM »
0
" or "Rick Alan Ross conviction" and you'll see multiple links confirming Mr. Ross's guilt.   

For all the negative shit Stefan Molyneux has done or said, he has never been convicted in any court for any crimes, let alone crimes that the convicting jury found, "beyond all possible bounds of decency" and "atrocious and intolerable in any civilized community". 

If FDR Liberated doesn't have the moral compass to denounce Rick Alan Ross, it doesn't have the moral compass to criticize Stefan Molyneux.

Setting up these false dichotomies with "If you don't X then you can't Y" is simply not true, because even if someone didn't apply the principles consistently to Rick Ross too, it doesn't mean that the claims against Stefan Molyneux are wrong, it only means that they didn't apply them consistently, or that they didn't apply them consistently, yet.

There are other reasons that people might have withheld judgment, or not come around to the same conclusion that you have, the most obvious of which is feeling like they haven't had enough information on the subject to judge accurately, or need more time to deliberate, or need it brought to their attention that he was unethical (and again time to research it, not 5 minutes of googling, as you said earlier).

To be honest I haven't done the research on this Ross guy to make sure your assessment is correct. Never heard of Ross before you mentioned him. So In my mind I thought it wouldn't be wise to comment on a person I knew nothing about.
The necessary research requires about five minutes and a fifth grade education, both of which you possess.   Google "Rick Alan Ross convicted" or "Rick Alan Ross conviction" and you'll see multiple links confirming Mr. Ross's guilt.   

Also, Stefan not being convicted in court and Rick Ross having been convicted is another false dichotomy that doesn't mean only the conclusion that you are wanting it to, there are other possibilities. It could mean that Stefan simply hasn't been charged for what he's done... yet. Even he admitted unethical behavior in his company years ago, didn't he?

I'm just saying that this seems like a lot of black and white, false... dichotomies that don't take into account other possibilities. That's the best way I can explain it.

You may be right about Rick Ross being worse than Stefan Molyneux, but rational thinkers take time to review the evidence and make sure that the information that they're getting is accurate, to come to a conclusion about something. Not 5 minutes of reading about it so they can declare that "Rick Ross is worse than Stefan Molyneux," especially when they know a lot about Stefan Molyneux, and next to nothing about Rick Ross.

Still, the truth is more important than the way you argue, so if Rick Ross is indeed that unethical, I want to be aware of that. I am also skeptical of using the term "cult expert."

Kaz

  • Ideological Gadfly
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
  • "Dangerous Liaisons" by Rene Magritte
  • Respect: +154
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2016, 07:50:22 PM »
+2
This is the best thread that has ever happened on FDR Liberated.  What was intended to be a discourse about Stefan Molyneux's "undue influence" has exposed the FDR Liberated community...

Now that you have exposed this entire "community" and demonstrated your superior moral authority, it stands to reason that your only logical recourse is to reject this community and find another more worthy of your time, correct?

No.  The other logical course of action is to point out that you sound like Michael DeMarco, and ask whether you were the first person to intimate either that Stefan Molyneux is a "cult leader" or that FDR is a "cult".

I can also ask you whether you've heard of Rick Ross's conviction before I mentioned it, and whether you think it's a good idea to cite him as an "authority" - given his conviction.

1.)  This thread is about the Standford Medical experiment and other studies of authoritarian dynamics.  It is not about a particular individual's history dating back 30 years ago. 
2.)  Your posts reveal that you do not know the difference between a criminal conviction and a civil judgement. 
3.)  In the past, any requests for you to substantiate your claims were met with you turning it upon the poster with evasions, excuses and flimsy justifications dressed up in abuse.
4.)  There have been many unsubstantiated claims made by you.  The fact that I am not requesting that you substantiate them is based on point 3.), and does not mean that they are accepted as true. 
5.)  A consequence of point 3.) is that we do not have to answer any of your questions, yet you are behaving as it you are entitled to ask.


« Last Edit: January 07, 2016, 07:56:25 PM by Kaz »
Just because you have left FDR, it doesn't mean that FDR has left you.

"Taking responsibility for something and self-blame are horses of two entirely different colors. The former is empowering; the latter is paralyzing." ~ John Rosemond, Ph.D

RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #33 on: January 07, 2016, 10:33:25 PM »
0
Setting up these false dichotomies with "If you don't X then you can't Y" is simply not true, because even if someone didn't apply the principles consistently to Rick Ross too, it doesn't mean that the claims against Stefan Molyneux are wrong, it only means that they didn't apply them consistently, or that they didn't apply them consistently, yet.


You're being far too vague.

The claims against Stefan are rooted in specific, often-repeated terms: "undue influence", "coercive persuasion", and "manipulation".   Rick Ross was paid by the relatives of Jason Scott to abduct him (against his will) from where he lived with a religious group, was placed in twenty-four hour confinement (again, against his will), and had to endure hours of being told that the religious leader he admired was a bad person. 

In my opinion, the actions of Rick Ross are extreme and obvious examples of "coercive persuasion" and "undue influence".  They are so extreme that they need to be denounced as unacceptable in any community, which is exactly how the convicting jury described Rick Ross's actions.   

Calling Stefan's behavior by the same terms, especially without denouncing Rick Ross is foolish and manipulative.  Because nothing Stefan has done has come close to what Rick Ross has done.   Stefan isn't "a lighter version of Rick Ross" - nor does he use "a different type of coercive persuasion and undue influence".   He's just an annoying guy with wrong headed views that rarely admits when he's wrong.

Quote

There are other reasons that people might have withheld judgment, or not come around to the same conclusion that you have, the most obvious of which is feeling like they haven't had enough information on the subject to judge accurately, or need more time to deliberate, or need it brought to their attention that he was unethical (and again time to research it, not 5 minutes of googling, as you said earlier).


What is there to deliberate?  The jury convicted Ross of the charges and awarded the defendant 5.875 million dollars in combined punitive ABC compensatory damages.  They deemed Ross's actions intolerable and indecent in any civil community. 

What else is there to think about?

Quote

You may be right about Rick Ross being worse than Stefan Molyneux, but rational thinkers take time to review the evidence and make sure that the information that they're getting is accurate, to come to a conclusion about something. Not 5 minutes of reading about it so they can declare that "Rick Ross is worse than Stefan Molyneux," especially when they know a lot about Stefan Molyneux, and next to nothing about Rick Ross.

Still, the truth is more important than the way you argue, so if Rick Ross is indeed that unethical, I want to be aware of that. I am also skeptical of using the term "cult expert."

Thank you.   

RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #34 on: January 07, 2016, 10:43:18 PM »
0
Quote


1.)  This thread is about the Standford Medical experiment and other studies of authoritarian dynamics.  It is not about a particular individual's history dating back 30 years ago. 


This point should be addressed to CupOTea, the first person who brought up Rick Alan Ross and introduced him as a leading "cult expert".


Quote

2.)  Your posts reveal that you do not know the difference between a criminal conviction and a civil judgement. 


The difference between a criminal conviction and a civil conviction is irrelevant.

Quote

3.)  In the past, any requests for you to substantiate your claims were met with you turning it upon the poster with evasions, excuses and flimsy justifications dressed up in abuse.


Your unwillingness to comment on the behavior of Rick Ross, especially in terms of "undue influence" and "coercive persuasion" is an evasion.


Quote

4.)  There have been many unsubstantiated claims made by you.  The fact that I am not requesting that you substantiate them is based on point 3.), and does not mean that they are accepted as true. 


Your refusal to discuss Rick Ross's behavior is an evasion.   Your refusal to acknowledge or debate the substantiated points I've made about Rick Ross is an evasion.


Quote

5.)  A consequence of point 3.) is that we do not have to answer any of your questions, yet you are behaving as it you are entitled to ask.

Your refusal to discuss Rick Ross is an evasion. 

To date, Free Man is the only person in this community besides me who openly suggests that Rick Ross may have done unethical shit.   

Everyone else evades discussion, except CupOTea and Mike_Lice (who both gave bad arguments, but at least tried). You're not even trying.   

Mike_Lice

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • Respect: +318
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #35 on: January 08, 2016, 12:08:16 AM »
0
Quote
Everyone else evades discussion, except CupOTea and Mike_Lice (who both gave bad arguments, but at least tried). You're not even trying.

lol what "discussion" are we having RB? I haven't given any arguments on this. As I stated before I never heard of Ross. Im trying to understand what he did and trying to figure out your position in all this.
This "discussion" you think we are having is all in your head. :) There is no discussion just me asking questions and confirming and understanding what you're on about.

PS I'm curious about these "bad arguments" I've given pertaining to Ross.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2016, 12:14:14 AM by Mike_Lice »

RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #36 on: January 08, 2016, 12:14:07 AM »
0
As I stated before I never heard of Ross. Im trying to understand what he did and trying to figure out your position in all this.

Cool.   So what disagreements about my summary of the Jason Scott trial do you dispute?

Mike_Lice

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • Respect: +318
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #37 on: January 08, 2016, 12:17:08 AM »
0
As I stated before I never heard of Ross. Im trying to understand what he did and trying to figure out your position in all this.

Cool.   So what disagreements about my summary of the Jason Scott trial do you dispute?

No my friend, lets first address my comment, Shall we. ;) Why do you claim that i've given "bad arguments"? I want you to show me where I've given these "bad arguments".

RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #38 on: January 08, 2016, 12:36:15 AM »
0
No my friend, lets first address my comment, Shall we. ;) Why do you claim that i've given "bad arguments"? I want you to show me where I've given these "bad arguments".

You argued that Rick Ross was wrongfully imprisoned.

Mike_Lice

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 679
  • Respect: +318
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #39 on: January 08, 2016, 01:23:36 AM »
+1
No my friend, lets first address my comment, Shall we. ;) Why do you claim that i've given "bad arguments"? I want you to show me where I've given these "bad arguments".

You argued that Rick Ross was wrongfully imprisoned.

LOL better read my comments again, cuz I wasn't arguing for Ross. I was asking questions to better understand what happened with this Ross guy.
If you interpret questions as "arguments" I don't think continuing this "discussion" is going to be fruitful.

Elucidated

  • Kallipolis Agitator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
  • Respect: +213
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #40 on: January 08, 2016, 04:10:10 AM »
+1

It is becoming increasingly tiresome watching people try to hold any sort of discussion with you.

You're the one who told me that you've studied "undue influence" and "manipulation" so well that you can identify it in PUA without impending it's techniques yourself, right?

No.

You're wrong.

Once again you are confusing me with another forum member. It is apparent that you barely read what people say never mind who said it, which is why you continually put words into people's mouths.

Quote
You're also the one who cut and pasted some material from Margaret Sanger on "coercive persuasion", right?
Congratulations, you're right.
Quote

My really simple argument is that the actions Rick Ross performed, especially kidnapping for hire and twenty-four hour forced confinement HAD BETTER BE prime examples of "undue influence", "manipulation", and "coercive persuasion".   Because if they're not (and FDR Liberated's discussions on the subject imply that they're not), then either those terms are stupid OR they're quite intelligent but you're applying them stupidly.

Are you refering to me when you say 'you're applying them stupidly'? as I haven't mentioned Rick Ross other than to ask you for a reference, or are you refering to all the forum members as though we are some collective body rather than a number of individuals?

I have plenty to say on the subject of Rick Ross, deprogramming, cults and undue influence. However I won't address to you as it is tiresome to attempt conversation with you. I would be wasting my time to put a post together only to have you mis-read, mis-interpret, put words in my mouth, hurl insults at me (or perhaps hurl insults at some other random forum member whom you assign my post to).



RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #41 on: January 08, 2016, 08:00:41 AM »
0
Quote


LOL better read my comments again, cuz I wasn't arguing for Ross. I was asking questions to better understand what happened with this Ross guy.
If you interpret questions as "arguments" I don't think continuing this "discussion" is going to be fruitful.

Now that we've addressed your bad arguments, what part about my summary of the Jason Scott trial do you dispute?  And if there are no disputes, then does that mean you automatically agree with my position that Rick Ross is a very reprehensible character with no authority as a "cult expert", who should my be cited by anyone on anything?

RecentlyBanned

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +10
Re: Cult deprogramming
« Reply #42 on: January 08, 2016, 08:12:55 AM »
0
Quote
Are you refering to me when you say 'you're applying them stupidly'? as I haven't mentioned Rick Ross other than to ask you for a reference, or are you refering to all the forum members as though we are some collective body rather than a number of individuals?


That you haven't commented on Rick Ross is evidence that you use the terms "undue influence" and "coercive persuasion" stupidly.   

If you click on the Wikipedia summary of the Jason Scott trial, Rick Ross hired three men to enter the home where Jason Scott lived, box him with duct tape and rope, drag him to a van, transport him against his will to an alternate building whose windows had been covered with nylon mesh, and interrogate him about his religious beliefs.   

Surely, you're talented enough and limited in your self-absorption enough to say, "Wow, man. That is reprehensible behavior.  In fact, that's so reprehensible that no one should site Rick Ross as an authority on anything."


Quote

I have plenty to say on the subject of Rick Ross, deprogramming, cults and undue influence. However I won't address to you as it is tiresome to attempt conversation with you. I would be wasting my time to put a post together only to have you mis-read, mis-interpret, put words in my mouth, hurl insults at me (or perhaps hurl insults at some other random forum member whom you assign my post to).

The fastest way to get this over with is to agree with me and to pressure CupOTea into never mentioning Rick Ross again.   Complaining how tiresome I am makes you look self-absorbed and morally weak, because I'm sure Jason Scott found his experiences with Rick Ross to be exponentially more tiresome.   But you're not acknowledging what he went through.   

To repeat, your use of the terms "undue influence" and "coercive persuasion" is unconvincing, given your difficult it is for you to use for words to call out Rick Ross's behavior.   Using them to call out Stefan Molyneux's behavior, while not using them to call out Rick Ross's behavior, makes you look dumb.

Referring to my mistakes to justify your decisions also makes you look dumb