Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2003, Page 23
Dr. Barker‘s classification invited much spirited discussion at a special AFF (American Family
Foundation) meeting after the 2002 annual conference. Moreover, it was a productive
exchange because her terminology, though disputable, invites, rather than closes off,
thought and discussion.
Even disregarding interesting proposals such as Dr. Barker‘s, we could all, at the very least,
contribute to more discerning dialogue by avoiding simplistic terminology that over
generalizes, such as ―pro-cult‖ and ―anti-cult.‖ We could, for example, be more specific in
our statements, e.g., ―Info-Cult has observed that‖ or ―INFORM‘s position is‖ or ―AFF has
found that.‖
It is also important that we clearly define the terms that we use. In this regard, AFF‘s
definitional essays bring to light the inherent ambiguity and potential for misuse in terms
such as ―cult‖: http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_aff/aff_termdefambiguity.htm
http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_aff/aff_termcultp2.htm
2. Do your homework.
Too often, people associated with both ―camps‖ make statements of ―fact‖ that, upon even
a cursory examination, are obviously wrong. It is especially troubling when these errors are
made by scholars, from whom more is expected. Sometimes these errors result from
hurried or sloppy research. Sometimes they result from a reliance on secondary sources. I
have noticed, for example, that much of the sociological literature about the so-called ―anti-
cult movement‖ consists of essays citing other sociological essays that make the same
unsubstantiated claims.
A colleague and I searched various sources and databases for studies on individual ―ACM‖
groups, and were unable to find even one sociological study that was systematically
researched. 1
3. Don’t lump individuals or groups together.
The sociological literature on the ―anti-cult movement‖ repeatedly makes the mistake of
presuming that all organizations and individuals, who express concerns about cults, have
uniform objectives, a common agenda, and close, interlinking relationships. In fact, there
are numerous differences, and most ―ACM‖ groups know very little about other groups and
individuals. Here is a partial list of organizations that Dr. Barker might categorize as ―cult
awareness groups‖ (all are from North America unless otherwise indicated):
Info-Cult/Info-Secte
American Family Foundation
Cult Information Service
1 The search words used were: Secte, anti-secte, Counter-cult, Cult, Anti-Cult, pro-secte, Pro-Cult,
Info-Cult, Info-Secte, Projet Culte, Cult Project, AFF (American Family Foundation), CAN (Cult
Awareness Network), Brainwashing, manipulation mentale, programming, deprogramming.
The following information and databases were searched.
FRANCIS, Repère sur le Web, Biblio branchée, Eureka, WebSPIRS, OVID, Web of Science, Psyinfo,
Sociological Abstracts, JSTOR, Project Muse, Emerald Library, Oxford University Press, Cambridge
University Press, Ingenta, Wiley InterScience, Érudit, World history, ATLAS Full Text, Kluwer,
ScienceDirect, Proquest Psychology Journals.
http://www.bib.umontreal.ca/SS/basesgen.htm
Dr. Barker‘s classification invited much spirited discussion at a special AFF (American Family
Foundation) meeting after the 2002 annual conference. Moreover, it was a productive
exchange because her terminology, though disputable, invites, rather than closes off,
thought and discussion.
Even disregarding interesting proposals such as Dr. Barker‘s, we could all, at the very least,
contribute to more discerning dialogue by avoiding simplistic terminology that over
generalizes, such as ―pro-cult‖ and ―anti-cult.‖ We could, for example, be more specific in
our statements, e.g., ―Info-Cult has observed that‖ or ―INFORM‘s position is‖ or ―AFF has
found that.‖
It is also important that we clearly define the terms that we use. In this regard, AFF‘s
definitional essays bring to light the inherent ambiguity and potential for misuse in terms
such as ―cult‖: http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_aff/aff_termdefambiguity.htm
http://www.cultinfobooks.com/infoserv_aff/aff_termcultp2.htm
2. Do your homework.
Too often, people associated with both ―camps‖ make statements of ―fact‖ that, upon even
a cursory examination, are obviously wrong. It is especially troubling when these errors are
made by scholars, from whom more is expected. Sometimes these errors result from
hurried or sloppy research. Sometimes they result from a reliance on secondary sources. I
have noticed, for example, that much of the sociological literature about the so-called ―anti-
cult movement‖ consists of essays citing other sociological essays that make the same
unsubstantiated claims.
A colleague and I searched various sources and databases for studies on individual ―ACM‖
groups, and were unable to find even one sociological study that was systematically
researched. 1
3. Don’t lump individuals or groups together.
The sociological literature on the ―anti-cult movement‖ repeatedly makes the mistake of
presuming that all organizations and individuals, who express concerns about cults, have
uniform objectives, a common agenda, and close, interlinking relationships. In fact, there
are numerous differences, and most ―ACM‖ groups know very little about other groups and
individuals. Here is a partial list of organizations that Dr. Barker might categorize as ―cult
awareness groups‖ (all are from North America unless otherwise indicated):
Info-Cult/Info-Secte
American Family Foundation
Cult Information Service
1 The search words used were: Secte, anti-secte, Counter-cult, Cult, Anti-Cult, pro-secte, Pro-Cult,
Info-Cult, Info-Secte, Projet Culte, Cult Project, AFF (American Family Foundation), CAN (Cult
Awareness Network), Brainwashing, manipulation mentale, programming, deprogramming.
The following information and databases were searched.
FRANCIS, Repère sur le Web, Biblio branchée, Eureka, WebSPIRS, OVID, Web of Science, Psyinfo,
Sociological Abstracts, JSTOR, Project Muse, Emerald Library, Oxford University Press, Cambridge
University Press, Ingenta, Wiley InterScience, Érudit, World history, ATLAS Full Text, Kluwer,
ScienceDirect, Proquest Psychology Journals.
http://www.bib.umontreal.ca/SS/basesgen.htm
