Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2008, Page 15
Kathleen Taylor would even go so far as to argue that she and others now understand
brainwashing down through the levels of physiology and biochemistry.
Several judges and parole-board personnel seem to have recognized that some people
brought before them had committed criminal acts while having been brainwashed, and a
few judges even have let defendants receive treatment before sentencing. These actions
make me question the categorical statement made by sociologist Lorne Dawson, who
indicated, ―American courts will no longer accept expert testimony on ‗cult brainwashing‘ as
scientifically credible‖ (Dawson, 2006:96). Evidence presented here shows that American
judges allowed defendants to receive treatment to counteract brainwashing, thought
reform, or mind control in at least two cult-related cases (Winnfred Wright and Karen
Robidoux), and brainwashing evidence was the central defense in the Malvo case. Likewise,
we should not arbitrarily discount the accounts (as some social scientists such as Dawson
would have us do) of people who have gone through intensive thought- and behavioural-
alteration programs, and subsequently have been able to reflect critically upon them (cf.
Dawson, 2006:106).8 Moreover, the appearance of a physiology book on brainwashing
should transform the debate about the concept to a new level of discourse, providing a
partial response to critics who assert that the concept itself is unscientific.
Whether confinement and force are necessary remains a research question rather than a
conclusion but suffice it to say that a few of the examples that I provided of professionals
using the brainwashing term involved situations of imprisoned confinement and immediate
physical punishment, while others did not. Indeed, some of the situations involved
manipulative drug use, so it seems likely that altered states play a role in the brainwashing
techniques found in some social settings.
Regardless of what ongoing researchers might find or what definitions they might use, it is
far too early to move beyond the brainwashing debate and leave important issues either
unexplored or unanswered (see Zablocki, 2001:168-169). I disagree, therefore, with the
position taken by sociologist of religion Lorne Dawson, whose call for expanding the study of
alternative religions beyond (among other issues) the ―‗brainwashing controversy‘‖ seems
like an attempt to shut the door on further examination of the concept‘s utility (see Lucas,
2007:12 cf. Zablocki, 1997). Intelligent, thoughtful people from a variety of backgrounds
continue to use the term, and social science will be remiss if it lets its own disciplinary
biases get in the way of legitimate, and potentially important, research.
End Notes
[1] The most extensive and diverse U.S. government research program involving the effects of LSD
was MK-Ultra, begun by the CIA in April 1953 and continued into the 1960s. Research involving LSD
apparently had six variants, all revolving around its possible use in warfare or covert operations.
Various experiments and projects attempted to use LSD to disturb people‘s memories facilitate
―aberrant‖ behavior, the performance of which would discredit the unwitting actors change people‘s
sexual patterns (and presumably opening them up to blackmail or other compromises) facilitate
interrogation heighten suggestibility and create dependence (presumably on the drug itself, thereby
making them susceptible to compromise [Scheflin and Opton, 1978:147]). Clearly, Asahara‘s use of
LSD to create a god-like illusion about himself among his followers is an example of using the drug to
heighten suggestibility, although I have no indication that the CIA ever tried to create godly delusions.
[2] I note, for example, that psychologist Yvonne Walsh dismissed use of the brainwashing term when
discussing controls that some ‗new religions‘ and ‗modern cults‘ employed against individuals, some of
whom subsequently entered therapy. She feared, for example, that ‗brainwashing‘ conveyed the use
of mystical and ―bizarre‖ techniques of control that (if they were real) would place them beyond the
realm of orthodox psychological intervention (Walsh, 20001:127). The techniques that cults and
others use, however, are well known within social psychology (Walsh, 2001:126). On this point, of
course, Taylor would agree, so it is unfortunate that Walsh rejected use of the brainwashing term
based upon a misconception. Walsh also insisted that brainwashing implies an ―apparent physical
Kathleen Taylor would even go so far as to argue that she and others now understand
brainwashing down through the levels of physiology and biochemistry.
Several judges and parole-board personnel seem to have recognized that some people
brought before them had committed criminal acts while having been brainwashed, and a
few judges even have let defendants receive treatment before sentencing. These actions
make me question the categorical statement made by sociologist Lorne Dawson, who
indicated, ―American courts will no longer accept expert testimony on ‗cult brainwashing‘ as
scientifically credible‖ (Dawson, 2006:96). Evidence presented here shows that American
judges allowed defendants to receive treatment to counteract brainwashing, thought
reform, or mind control in at least two cult-related cases (Winnfred Wright and Karen
Robidoux), and brainwashing evidence was the central defense in the Malvo case. Likewise,
we should not arbitrarily discount the accounts (as some social scientists such as Dawson
would have us do) of people who have gone through intensive thought- and behavioural-
alteration programs, and subsequently have been able to reflect critically upon them (cf.
Dawson, 2006:106).8 Moreover, the appearance of a physiology book on brainwashing
should transform the debate about the concept to a new level of discourse, providing a
partial response to critics who assert that the concept itself is unscientific.
Whether confinement and force are necessary remains a research question rather than a
conclusion but suffice it to say that a few of the examples that I provided of professionals
using the brainwashing term involved situations of imprisoned confinement and immediate
physical punishment, while others did not. Indeed, some of the situations involved
manipulative drug use, so it seems likely that altered states play a role in the brainwashing
techniques found in some social settings.
Regardless of what ongoing researchers might find or what definitions they might use, it is
far too early to move beyond the brainwashing debate and leave important issues either
unexplored or unanswered (see Zablocki, 2001:168-169). I disagree, therefore, with the
position taken by sociologist of religion Lorne Dawson, whose call for expanding the study of
alternative religions beyond (among other issues) the ―‗brainwashing controversy‘‖ seems
like an attempt to shut the door on further examination of the concept‘s utility (see Lucas,
2007:12 cf. Zablocki, 1997). Intelligent, thoughtful people from a variety of backgrounds
continue to use the term, and social science will be remiss if it lets its own disciplinary
biases get in the way of legitimate, and potentially important, research.
End Notes
[1] The most extensive and diverse U.S. government research program involving the effects of LSD
was MK-Ultra, begun by the CIA in April 1953 and continued into the 1960s. Research involving LSD
apparently had six variants, all revolving around its possible use in warfare or covert operations.
Various experiments and projects attempted to use LSD to disturb people‘s memories facilitate
―aberrant‖ behavior, the performance of which would discredit the unwitting actors change people‘s
sexual patterns (and presumably opening them up to blackmail or other compromises) facilitate
interrogation heighten suggestibility and create dependence (presumably on the drug itself, thereby
making them susceptible to compromise [Scheflin and Opton, 1978:147]). Clearly, Asahara‘s use of
LSD to create a god-like illusion about himself among his followers is an example of using the drug to
heighten suggestibility, although I have no indication that the CIA ever tried to create godly delusions.
[2] I note, for example, that psychologist Yvonne Walsh dismissed use of the brainwashing term when
discussing controls that some ‗new religions‘ and ‗modern cults‘ employed against individuals, some of
whom subsequently entered therapy. She feared, for example, that ‗brainwashing‘ conveyed the use
of mystical and ―bizarre‖ techniques of control that (if they were real) would place them beyond the
realm of orthodox psychological intervention (Walsh, 20001:127). The techniques that cults and
others use, however, are well known within social psychology (Walsh, 2001:126). On this point, of
course, Taylor would agree, so it is unfortunate that Walsh rejected use of the brainwashing term
based upon a misconception. Walsh also insisted that brainwashing implies an ―apparent physical
