How do you say “this a cult” without literally saying the words “this is a cult”? (In the common colloquial sense of the word “cult”, as opposed the historical academic sense of the word.)
I’ve never heard of this organization until now and I’d be happy never to hear about them in the future. (This isn’t a criticism of OP.)
Once I wrote an article about how to unpack “cult” into eight more specific behaviors. It wasn’t received well. Ironically, one of the objections was that this would also classify Leverage as a cult. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No, that was not the objection. My main point was about you asserting a bad binary classification frame. I made no assertion that Leverage fulfilled all the criteria.
It was rather the opposite. If Leverage would indeed fulfill all criteria then a binary classification of them as being a cult wouldn’t be a problem.
How do you say “this a cult” without literally saying the words “this is a cult”? (In the common colloquial sense of the word “cult”, as opposed the historical academic sense of the word.)
I’ve never heard of this organization until now and I’d be happy never to hear about them in the future. (This isn’t a criticism of OP.)
Once I wrote an article about how to unpack “cult” into eight more specific behaviors. It wasn’t received well. Ironically, one of the objections was that this would also classify Leverage as a cult. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No, that was not the objection. My main point was about you asserting a bad binary classification frame. I made no assertion that Leverage fulfilled all the criteria.
It was rather the opposite. If Leverage would indeed fulfill all criteria then a binary classification of them as being a cult wouldn’t be a problem.
Hahaha!