Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 40
Singer, M. T. (1982, November 18). Cults: Dynamics of mind control. Paper presented in
Santa Barbara, CA.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Dr. Arthur Dole of the University of Pennsylvania for his extensive
and valuable comments and suggestions and Carol Giambalvo and Nancy Miquelon, leaders
of FOCUS, an ex-cultist support group, for their assistance in gaining access to subjects.
**************
Michael D. Langone, Ph.D., Editor of the Cultic Studies Journal, is the Executive Director
of the American Family Foundation and coauthor of Cults: What parents should know and
Satanism and occult-related violence.
William V. Chambers, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor of Psychology at the University of
South Florida. His specialty areas include Personal Construct Theory and psychometrics.
This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8,
Number 2, pages 134-150. Please keep in mind that the pagination of this electronic reprint differs from that of the
bound volume. This fact could affect how you enter bibliographic information in papers that you may write.

Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1991, Page 41
Interesting Times
Kevin Garvey -Linda Blood
Abstract
The report, Satanism in America, by the Committee for the Scientific
Examination of Religion (CSER) purports to show dm destructive effects and
criminal activities allegedly associated with Satanism are actually the product
of hysteria and can be explained away by exposing the “opportunism,
emotional instability, and religious bigotry” of those who concern themselves
with these problems. Here we show that the CSER report itself contains
fundamental methodological flaws, including use of the logical fallacy known
as the argumentum ad hominem, a naive approach to its subject, disregard
for the empirical evidence, and omission of material damaging to the public
postures of the “recognized satanic churches.” Thus a work which could have
been a valuable contribution to the debate over the nature and extent of
problems associated with Satanism merely contributes to, and indeed serves
to aggravate, the already existing polarization concerning this subject.
Irony and pathos increasingly emerge as the criteria by which our era must be assessed. As
the signs of social deterioration multiply, swarms of pundits and apologists gather to feast
on the shards of our former hopes and certitudes. The spectacle created by the advocates of
competing viewpoints is a disquieting reminder of the Chinese aphorism, “May you live in
interesting times.” We do indeed, and the irony is that the increased interest generated by
the commentators on our crises too often fosters pathos. This is especially true when the
pundits and apologists are easily exposed by their own inadequacies. Such is the case with
Satanism in America, the recent report by the Committee for the Scientific Examination of
Religion (CSER).
This report was written by a collection of authors officially representing the Academy of
Humanism. This group is integrally connected to the Committee for the Scientific
Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), which has produced various and
admirable works exposing religious and scientific frauds. The parent group has as associates
such reputable people as Martin Gardner and Carl Sagan. It is not necessary to agree with
every word such people utter to know that one is being addressed by honest scholarship,
intelligent reasoning, and challenging opinion. Such, alas, is not the case with Satanism in
America, and that is why this report merits a detailed critique. It is not worthy of its
impressive lineage, which endows it with an undeserved presumption of credibility.
The obvious dilemmas posed by this report may partially stem from the fact that it was
prepared by a committee. The primary authors are: Shawn Carlson, Ph.D., physicist Gerald
Larue, Emeritus Professor of Religion, University of Southern California Gerry O‟Sullivan,
April A. Masche, and D. Hudson Frew. These authors wrote the bulk of the report. Three
shorter reports are included as appendices. They were written by Robert Hicks, a Criminal
Justice Analyst, Kenneth Lanning, a Special Agent of the F.B.I., and Michael Stackpole, who
writes on role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons. This is an impressive-
sounding group. Their product is also impressive -but not for the authors‟ intended
purposes.
What is impressive about this study? The first thing is its temerity. It addresses an
important, difficult, volatile topic without failing to comment on each of its many facets. The
second impressive aspect is the study‟s clearly stated intention. The authors declare in their
Introduction: