Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2005, Page 70
the theory is unscientific. But even a cursory examination of the theory as written shows
that it nowhere argues that the target ever becomes unable to resist propaganda.
Furthermore, the theory says nothing about totalitarian world views but is concerned
instead with susceptibility to charismatic influence.
Proposition 14. (Page 222) In addition, brainwashing formulations contend:
14a) that such influence occurs without pre-existing motives or character traits
which predispose those who are influenced to respond positively to the new world
views
14b) that once converted to the new world view, a brainwashed convert has difficulty
repudiating it, so that in effect the new world view has become a sort of addiction
14c) that such brainwashed conversion and commitment to new world views
overwhelms the free will of its victims without the use of physical coercion.
disputational X relevant part b only correct
In this proposition, Anthony describes three hypotheses that he believes to be a part of my
theory. This proposition is not disputational, but if Anthony can establish its validity, he
believes that he can use it in other disputational propositions. Let us consider these three
hypotheses, one by one:
§ 14a. My theory makes no prejudgment one way or another about pre-existing
motives or character traits. It is concerned with an influence mechanism used on target
persons who are already members of voluntary charismatic movements. Presumably most,
if not all, of these individuals will have joined and stayed because of some pre-existing
motives or character traits. The absence of discussion of these motives or traits in my
theory indicates only that their relevance is something to be discovered by empirical
research. It may turn out that the strength of pre-existing motives or traits is correlated
with the likelihood that the brainwashing process will be successful. Or it may turn out that
there is no such correlation. Either finding is compatible with the theory as written.
§ 14b. This is the one element of this proposition that is semi-correct and relevant. I
say semi-correct because the charismatic obedience and attachment to the group are what
have become addictive, not what Anthony calls ―the new world view.‖ But the charge that I
see brainwashing as producing a kind of addictive dependency is correct. Addictive
dependencies are hard but not impossible to resist. My understanding of addiction
apparently differs from Anthony‘s. Whereas he sees an addict as one whose free will has
been overthrown, I see addictions as only a strong form of the obsessive-compulsive habits
that we all experience in our lives to some degree and that sometimes require a good deal
of conscious effort to resist.
§ 14c. This is more of Anthony‘s fabrication of a free-will hypothesis. At the risk of
being just a tad repetitive, I must again reiterate that nowhere in my theory is anything
said or implied about free will. I don‘t consider free will to be a scientific concept. Free will is
not something that I‘ve ever thought about in connection with brainwashing.
Tactical Ambiguity
Proposition 15. (Page 223) Cultic brainwashing formulations are stated in a fashion that
is essentially ambiguous and which thus tends to render them immune to empirical
evaluation.... Among the forms such ambiguity takes in cultic brainwashing formulations are
the following:
15a) internal contradictions
15b) unfalsifiable identifying characteristics for key variables and predictions
the theory is unscientific. But even a cursory examination of the theory as written shows
that it nowhere argues that the target ever becomes unable to resist propaganda.
Furthermore, the theory says nothing about totalitarian world views but is concerned
instead with susceptibility to charismatic influence.
Proposition 14. (Page 222) In addition, brainwashing formulations contend:
14a) that such influence occurs without pre-existing motives or character traits
which predispose those who are influenced to respond positively to the new world
views
14b) that once converted to the new world view, a brainwashed convert has difficulty
repudiating it, so that in effect the new world view has become a sort of addiction
14c) that such brainwashed conversion and commitment to new world views
overwhelms the free will of its victims without the use of physical coercion.
disputational X relevant part b only correct
In this proposition, Anthony describes three hypotheses that he believes to be a part of my
theory. This proposition is not disputational, but if Anthony can establish its validity, he
believes that he can use it in other disputational propositions. Let us consider these three
hypotheses, one by one:
§ 14a. My theory makes no prejudgment one way or another about pre-existing
motives or character traits. It is concerned with an influence mechanism used on target
persons who are already members of voluntary charismatic movements. Presumably most,
if not all, of these individuals will have joined and stayed because of some pre-existing
motives or character traits. The absence of discussion of these motives or traits in my
theory indicates only that their relevance is something to be discovered by empirical
research. It may turn out that the strength of pre-existing motives or traits is correlated
with the likelihood that the brainwashing process will be successful. Or it may turn out that
there is no such correlation. Either finding is compatible with the theory as written.
§ 14b. This is the one element of this proposition that is semi-correct and relevant. I
say semi-correct because the charismatic obedience and attachment to the group are what
have become addictive, not what Anthony calls ―the new world view.‖ But the charge that I
see brainwashing as producing a kind of addictive dependency is correct. Addictive
dependencies are hard but not impossible to resist. My understanding of addiction
apparently differs from Anthony‘s. Whereas he sees an addict as one whose free will has
been overthrown, I see addictions as only a strong form of the obsessive-compulsive habits
that we all experience in our lives to some degree and that sometimes require a good deal
of conscious effort to resist.
§ 14c. This is more of Anthony‘s fabrication of a free-will hypothesis. At the risk of
being just a tad repetitive, I must again reiterate that nowhere in my theory is anything
said or implied about free will. I don‘t consider free will to be a scientific concept. Free will is
not something that I‘ve ever thought about in connection with brainwashing.
Tactical Ambiguity
Proposition 15. (Page 223) Cultic brainwashing formulations are stated in a fashion that
is essentially ambiguous and which thus tends to render them immune to empirical
evaluation.... Among the forms such ambiguity takes in cultic brainwashing formulations are
the following:
15a) internal contradictions
15b) unfalsifiable identifying characteristics for key variables and predictions
