4 ms·

Well, that's hard to say - many cults actually make associations with successful people and then claim that their success is based on the influence/teachings of

by yamada 19y ago

Well, that's hard to say - many cults actually make associations with successful people and then claim that their success is based on the influence/teachings of the cult. I'm sure some people think scientology is a cult (it is in the process of being declared criminal in some EU member states) and Sky Dayton seems to be doing ok. And of course, the trickiest part is that the group always claims that its output is beneficial and if you don't understand how it is, well then that's why you need the group to explain it to you.

shiro 19y ago
Yes, that's why I said it's not perfect. The thing is, to some people, the cult's methodology works for their success (since many mind-control techniques are not evil by themselves, and can be used to improve one's life if used wisely). You have to look at not only those successful cases, but also the rest of cases---if the group has contributed to the success of a few celebrities, but not for the 99.9% of other members, then the success cases are likely to be by chance rather than the real result of the cult.
- dood 19y ago
  A better test may be simply: does the belief/practice lead to health and happiness for the practitioners, and those they affect and interact with?
  - shiro 19y ago
    Unfortunately, you can make people subjectively happy by mind-control techniques. Being healthy is also difficult to define (to some extent).
- yamada 19y ago
  So then how do you distinguish that? Like does YCombinator method make people succeed? Or is it good at identifying likely future successes and convincing them to associate with YCombinator? Or both? How do you gage the effect either way? In other words, does YC make the successes, or is it better at systematically finding them and associating with them?
  - shiro 19y ago
    You can't draw a concrete line, and it may take time. However, if, say, a few years later, 30% of YC companies succeeds big and 50% of them are producing good results (not necessarily in their startup, but by taking important roles in other companies), then people can hardly say YC is a destructive cult.
    - yamada 19y ago
      Depends on how you look at it. Most web 2.0 innovations are just reiterations of low-yield activities designed to encourage phatic communication at the cost of personal and corporate productivity. Who knows what effect that will have on, say, our national economy?
      - shiro 19y ago
        Time will tell. Meantime, all you can do is to watch the concrete numbers. Note that the line between destructive cults and other groups are not only blurry, but some cults may morph into a normal group over time, or vice versa. If you really suspect a certain group is a cult and want to do something about it in a short span, watch a concrete prediction the group makes (somehow lots of cult leaders often makes them, e.g. the world will end by year 20XX). Then compare the outcome. Don't be destructed by what the member of the groups says, or how the group is organized and managed. Look for the objective evidence.

by yamada 19y ago

shiro 19y ago

Yes, that's why I said it's not perfect. The thing is, to some people, the cult's methodology works for their success (since many mind-control techniques are not evil by themselves, and can be used to improve one's life if used wisely). You have to look at not only those successful cases, but also the rest of cases---if the group has contributed to the success of a few celebrities, but not for the 99.9% of other members, then the success cases are likely to be by chance rather than the real result of the cult.

dood 19y ago
A better test may be simply: does the belief/practice lead to health and happiness for the practitioners, and those they affect and interact with?
- shiro 19y ago
  Unfortunately, you can make people subjectively happy by mind-control techniques. Being healthy is also difficult to define (to some extent).
yamada 19y ago
So then how do you distinguish that? Like does YCombinator method make people succeed? Or is it good at identifying likely future successes and convincing them to associate with YCombinator? Or both? How do you gage the effect either way? In other words, does YC make the successes, or is it better at systematically finding them and associating with them?
- shiro 19y ago
  You can't draw a concrete line, and it may take time. However, if, say, a few years later, 30% of YC companies succeeds big and 50% of them are producing good results (not necessarily in their startup, but by taking important roles in other companies), then people can hardly say YC is a destructive cult.
  - yamada 19y ago
    Depends on how you look at it. Most web 2.0 innovations are just reiterations of low-yield activities designed to encourage phatic communication at the cost of personal and corporate productivity. Who knows what effect that will have on, say, our national economy?
    - shiro 19y ago
      Time will tell. Meantime, all you can do is to watch the concrete numbers. Note that the line between destructive cults and other groups are not only blurry, but some cults may morph into a normal group over time, or vice versa. If you really suspect a certain group is a cult and want to do something about it in a short span, watch a concrete prediction the group makes (somehow lots of cult leaders often makes them, e.g. the world will end by year 20XX). Then compare the outcome. Don't be destructed by what the member of the groups says, or how the group is organized and managed. Look for the objective evidence.