Hi,

There's a new active forum where you can discuss the pro's and cons of Primal Therapy and Theory. And the cult aspect of it.

Come and have a look, registration is optional:

[freepgs.com]

What is the operational definition of a cult? When and how and why did that definition come to be the one essential definition?

Based on an objective definition of a cult, is primal therapy not a cult, partially a cult or competely and essentially a cult?

For me, for example, communism is a cult.

It has heavy recrutiment practices, creates cults of personality around its leaders (Lenin, Mao, CheGuevara, Kim Il Jong, the ex-leaders of Romania and Albania and Yugoslavia as well), doesn't allow you to leave and enforces this with real violence, thinks it can save the world, and so on.

There is hardly an activity of Scientology that would not have been ok'd by the Kremlin.

Opus Dei may be a cult, but when someone near and dear to me went to sign up to be a nun, the nuns told her she was running away from the world and didn't accept her.

Hardly cult-like behavior, however much I remain critical of the mindset of the Church.

So, to reiterate, what is this guiding definition of [i:74aa19327b]cult[/i:74aa19327b]?

Chucky

Yes. There is a working definition.

See [www.culteducation.com]

And also [www.culteducation.com]

Personality-driven regimes such as North Korea and other Communist states with dictators can be quite cult-like as is a fascist state like Nazi Germany or Italy under Mussolini.

But you do need a living leader to be the defining element and central focus of power and authority to animate a cult.