http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/12/evaporative-coo.html
Early studiers of cults were surprised to discover than when cults receive a major shock - a prophecy fails to come true, a moral flaw of the founder is revealed - they often come back stronger than before, with increased belief and fanaticism. The Jehovah's Witnesses placed Armageddon in 1975, based on Biblical calculations; 1975 has come and passed. The Unarian cult, still going strong today, survived the nonappearance of an intergalactic spacefleet on September 27, 1975. (The Wikipedia article on Unarianism mentions a failed prophecy in 2001, but makes no mention of the earlier failure in 1975, interestingly enough.)
Why would a group belief become stronger after encountering crushing counterevidence?
The conventional interpretation of this phenomenon is based on cognitive dissonance. When people have taken "irrevocable" actions in the service of a belief - given away all their property in anticipation of the saucers landing - they cannot possibly admit they were mistaken. The challenge to their belief presents an immense cognitive dissonance; they must find reinforcing thoughts to counter the shock, and so become more fanatical. In this interpretation, the increased group fanaticism is the result of increased individual fanaticism.
I was looking at a Java applet which demonstrates the use of evaporative cooling to form a Bose-Einstein condensate (http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/bec/evap_cool.html), when it occurred to me that another force entirely might operate to increase fanaticism. Evaporative cooling sets up a potential energy barrier around a collection of hot atoms. Thermal energy is essentially statistical in nature - not all atoms are moving at the exact same speed. The kinetic energy of any given atom varies as the atoms collide with each other. If you set up a potential energy barrier that's just a little higher than the average thermal energy, the workings of chance will give an occasional atom a kinetic energy high enough to escape the trap. When an unusually fast atom escapes, it takes with an unusually large amount of kinetic energy, and the average energy decreases. The group becomes substantially cooler than the potential energy barrier around it. Playing with the Java applet may make this clearer.
In Festinger's classic "When Prophecy Fails", one of the cult members walked out the door immediately after the flying saucer failed to land. Who gets fed up and leaves first? An average cult member? Or a relatively more skeptical member, who previously might have been acting as a voice of moderation, a brake on the more fanatic members?
After the members with the highest kinetic energy escape, the remaining discussions will be between the extreme fanatics on one end and the slightly less extreme fanatics on the other end, with the group consensus somewhere in the "middle"...
This is one reason why it's important to be prejudiced in favor of tolerating dissent. Wait until substantially after it seems to you justified in ejecting a member from the group, before actually ejecting. If you get rid of the old outliers, the group position will shift, and someone else will become the oddball. If you eject them too, you're well on the way to becoming a Bose-Einstein condensate and, er, exploding.
Nice metaphor. Very concise, and accurate.
Well... maybe.
In the case of JW's, they've predicted the End several times, 1888, 1914, 1975, before 2000, before people alive in 1914 all died out... it just goes on and on.
HOWEVER, they survive through a number of different means.
1) They never CLAIM to be prophets, only humans 'trying' to interpret Gods word. For example they claimed that 1975 represented the 6000th year since the creation of Adam. As they hold "Days" in God sense to be 1000 years, then it made sense that god would allow man to continue for 6 days, then the 7th day would be one of rest. This hinted at (and many people interpreted it as) the 1000 year reign of Jesus starting in 1975. They took everyone there without stating the 'prophecy' directly.
2) They don't claim to be speaking for god or prophesying... only 'imperfect humans trying to better understand'. Thus they get away with a lot.
3) NO ONE TALKS ABOUT THE WHOOPSIES. In the group, IF 1975 or something like that comes up, its blamed on the believers for relying too much on ideas and understanding, not on the crazy people that thought they understood... nor is the "Well, if they got that wrong... what about everything else?" line of reasoning permitted.
4) Constant Recruitment. The n00bs don't know about the other stuff... or if they do know, its only through the reality tunnel of the existing believers.
5) They are genuinely nice people. Most JW's will give you the shirt off their back, even if you're not one of them. They are encouraged to Do Good Works in every aspect of their life. On a number of occasions I and/or friends would be out in the ministry and find some family that had no food. It was common to stop the door to door work, go to a grocery store and buy up food. Irregardless of the persons intent to speak with us or not. Often, the food was just left at the door and nothing was said at all. That sort of community is very appealing to some kinds of people.
In the example of JW's, post-1975 they actually trended towards less dogmatism rather than more. Though the early 90's saw a resurgence of hardcore dogmatic talks/lectures... that has again, apparently faded since it no longer seems to resonate with many of their followers anymore. In fact, they've reversed a number of hardcore positions they traditionally held in just the past few years.
I left, in part because of a similar claim... which got changed and within a couple months got played off as "Some people believed..." rather than "We published this horseshit in several books, but we were wrong". It was the fact that they didn't simply say "Whoops, we screwed up" that really pricked me. If they had been honest at that point, I might still be stuck there.
Rat, as interesting as your history with the JW is, please try to concentrate on the bigger point the post is trying to make.
Yours truly,
-The nicer side of what you've been hearing the last few days.
Quote from: LMNO on October 22, 2008, 05:48:52 PM
Nice metaphor. Very concise, and accurate.
It's the only "quantum analogy" that has ever made sense to me but that's probably because of the weird intersection of chemistry and religion. :D I saw someone suggest that this is what is happening to the Republican party right now with the social moderates finally getting fed up with the Religious Right. *shrug* Who knows....
Quote from: LMNO on October 22, 2008, 06:08:26 PM
Rat, as interesting as your history with the JW is, please try to concentrate on the bigger point the post is trying to make.
Yours truly,
-The nicer side of what you've been hearing the last few days.
You're right.
Sorry I rambled off on a tangent re one particular cult. :)
From a group dynamic position I like the example. I wonder how it plays out in other social groups, as well as cults. In fact it made me think of how the GOP and Dems both seem to continue slides away from the center, while they hemorrhage some individuals out to the 'independent' area.'
They are only cults until they drink the kool-aid. :argh!:
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 22, 2008, 06:05:47 PM
Well... maybe.
In the case of JW's, they've predicted the End several times, 1888, 1914, 1975, before 2000, before people alive in 1914 all died out... it just goes on and on.
It'd be interesting to see how their membership numbers changed after every single incident. (I'm sure that the numbers were either never totalled or scrubbed from the records since then). I know that after The Great Disappointment the Millerites lots almost their entire congregation due to both dashed hopes and theological infighting. I'm sure that JW lost plenty of moderates along the way too.
QuoteHOWEVER, they survive through a number of different means.
1) They never CLAIM to be prophets, only humans 'trying' to interpret Gods word. For example they claimed that 1975 represented the 6000th year since the creation of Adam. As they hold "Days" in God sense to be 1000 years, then it made sense that god would allow man to continue for 6 days, then the 7th day would be one of rest. This hinted at (and many people interpreted it as) the 1000 year reign of Jesus starting in 1975. They took everyone there without stating the 'prophecy' directly.
2) They don't claim to be speaking for god or prophesying... only 'imperfect humans trying to better understand'. Thus they get away with a lot.
3) NO ONE TALKS ABOUT THE WHOOPSIES. In the group, IF 1975 or something like that comes up, its blamed on the believers for relying too much on ideas and understanding, not on the crazy people that thought they understood... nor is the "Well, if they got that wrong... what about everything else?" line of reasoning permitted.
You get a lot of different post hoc rationalizations after failed predictions like that (someone messed up my reading, Satan did it, he was a false prophet, God was testing us, etc.) That's why ever good psychic knows better than to give details, especially specific dates.
Quote4) Constant Recruitment. The n00bs don't know about the other stuff... or if they do know, its only through the reality tunnel of the existing believers.
Every religion is a self-preserving meme.
Quote5) They are genuinely nice people. Most JW's will give you the shirt off their back, even if you're not one of them. They are encouraged to Do Good Works in every aspect of their life. On a number of occasions I and/or friends would be out in the ministry and find some family that had no food. It was common to stop the door to door work, go to a grocery store and buy up food. Irregardless of the persons intent to speak with us or not. Often, the food was just left at the door and nothing was said at all. That sort of community is very appealing to some kinds of people.
That's an odd non sequitur. No one ever said that cult followers were bad/evil people. I'm sure that there are plenty of kind and generous people in every cult: JWs, SDAs, Scientologist, Southern Baptists (but not Calvinists, the evil bastards). They just tend to be less rational than the average population for reasons stated in the OP.
Quote from: LMNO on October 22, 2008, 06:08:26 PM
Rat, as interesting as your history with the JW is, please try to concentrate on the bigger point the post is trying to make.
Yours truly,
-The nicer side of what you've been hearing the last few days.
I believe the correct term is "straining at gnats". ;)
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 22, 2008, 09:35:11 PM
Quote from: Ratatosk on October 22, 2008, 06:05:47 PM
Well... maybe.
In the case of JW's, they've predicted the End several times, 1888, 1914, 1975, before 2000, before people alive in 1914 all died out... it just goes on and on.
It'd be interesting to see how their membership numbers changed after every single incident. (I'm sure that the numbers were either never totalled or scrubbed from the records since then). I know that after The Great Disappointment the Millerites lots almost their entire congregation due to both dashed hopes and theological infighting. I'm sure that JW lost plenty of moderates along the way too.
QuoteHOWEVER, they survive through a number of different means.
1) They never CLAIM to be prophets, only humans 'trying' to interpret Gods word. For example they claimed that 1975 represented the 6000th year since the creation of Adam. As they hold "Days" in God sense to be 1000 years, then it made sense that god would allow man to continue for 6 days, then the 7th day would be one of rest. This hinted at (and many people interpreted it as) the 1000 year reign of Jesus starting in 1975. They took everyone there without stating the 'prophecy' directly.
2) They don't claim to be speaking for god or prophesying... only 'imperfect humans trying to better understand'. Thus they get away with a lot.
3) NO ONE TALKS ABOUT THE WHOOPSIES. In the group, IF 1975 or something like that comes up, its blamed on the believers for relying too much on ideas and understanding, not on the crazy people that thought they understood... nor is the "Well, if they got that wrong... what about everything else?" line of reasoning permitted.
You get a lot of different post hoc rationalizations after failed predictions like that (someone messed up my reading, Satan did it, he was a false prophet, God was testing us, etc.) That's why ever good psychic knows better than to give details, especially specific dates.
Quote4) Constant Recruitment. The n00bs don't know about the other stuff... or if they do know, its only through the reality tunnel of the existing believers.
Every religion is a self-preserving meme.
Quote5) They are genuinely nice people. Most JW's will give you the shirt off their back, even if you're not one of them. They are encouraged to Do Good Works in every aspect of their life. On a number of occasions I and/or friends would be out in the ministry and find some family that had no food. It was common to stop the door to door work, go to a grocery store and buy up food. Irregardless of the persons intent to speak with us or not. Often, the food was just left at the door and nothing was said at all. That sort of community is very appealing to some kinds of people.
That's an odd non sequitur. No one ever said that cult followers were bad/evil people. I'm sure that there are plenty of kind and generous people in every cult: JWs, SDAs, Scientologist, Southern Baptists (but not Calvinists, the evil bastards). They just tend to be less rational than the average population for reasons stated in the OP.
Oh I didn't mean it in that sense.. rather I meant 'nice' is a recruitment tool. They're genuinely nice... don't get me wrong, but that niceness is an extremely useful tool for keeping numbers up, even after failed prophecy ;-)
However, strained gnats and stuff ... so back to the original discussion ;-)
Excellent link there, Iason. A book I'm re-reading and hope to provide a synopsis for here on the forums, The Religious Case Against Belief, deals partly with the notion that believers actually thrive on opposition, rather than being challenged by it.
Quote from: Cainad on October 23, 2008, 12:46:30 AM
Excellent link there, Iason. A book I'm re-reading and hope to provide a synopsis for here on the forums, The Religious Case Against Belief, deals partly with the notion that believers actually thrive on opposition, rather than being challenged by it.
That would make sense in some belief systems as they intentionally lay out an Us VS Them sort of reality tunnel.
"We have the Truth"
"They are trying to confuse you"
I mean, once you believe that Satan, Thetens or whoever is in charge of your enemies brains... its easy to discount any argument they make "That argument sounds right, but it disagrees with me... IT MUST BE A TRICK!"
Greyfaces
Quote from: Cainad on October 23, 2008, 12:46:30 AM
Excellent link there, Iason. A book I'm re-reading and hope to provide a synopsis for here on the forums, The Religious Case Against Belief, deals partly with the notion that believers actually thrive on opposition, rather than being challenged by it.
I think that I've seen you mention that book before. Sounds really interesting. I need to find a copy of that and a good (objective) book on The Second Great Awakening. There were a lot of crazy religions popping up in the US in the 19th century. It'd be very interesting to see why so many failed and why a few of them are still going strong.
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 23, 2008, 06:24:44 PM
Quote from: Cainad on October 23, 2008, 12:46:30 AM
Excellent link there, Iason. A book I'm re-reading and hope to provide a synopsis for here on the forums, The Religious Case Against Belief, deals partly with the notion that believers actually thrive on opposition, rather than being challenged by it.
I think that I've seen you mention that book before. Sounds really interesting. I need to find a copy of that and a good (objective) book on The Second Great Awakening. There were a lot of crazy religions popping up in the US in the 19th century. It'd be very interesting to see why so many failed and why a few of them are still going strong.
I have mentioned it, and praised it heavily. This is because I'm young and therefore have not read a whole lot, meaning every time I pick up a new book I'm all "ZOMG this is the most brilliant book evar!" :kingmeh:
Quote from: Cainad on October 23, 2008, 07:02:06 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 23, 2008, 06:24:44 PM
Quote from: Cainad on October 23, 2008, 12:46:30 AM
Excellent link there, Iason. A book I'm re-reading and hope to provide a synopsis for here on the forums, The Religious Case Against Belief, deals partly with the notion that believers actually thrive on opposition, rather than being challenged by it.
I think that I've seen you mention that book before. Sounds really interesting. I need to find a copy of that and a good (objective) book on The Second Great Awakening. There were a lot of crazy religions popping up in the US in the 19th century. It'd be very interesting to see why so many failed and why a few of them are still going strong.
I have mentioned it, and praised it heavily. This is because I'm young and therefore have not read a whole lot, meaning every time I pick up a new book I'm all "ZOMG this is the most brilliant book evar!" :kingmeh:
As long as its in your reality... you're right ;-)
I find that everytime I pick up a new book, it impacts my perception of reality for a long while.
Books are teh awesome ;-)
In an unrelated relationship between cults and bose-einstein condensates, both happen to be best modeled in network theory in terms of scale-free networks. The same is true of actors, and the world wide web.
Bump --- well sort of... well might not be as related as my search made it out to be... but could be interesting article for you BIP Spags
When Prophecy Fails and Faith Persists:
A Theoretical Overview
By
Lorne L. Dawson
http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/pdf/10.1525/nr.1999.3.1.60?cookieSet=1
nothing overly new, but so far well thought out and interesting...
Your link is busted, Thornie. Try this instead:
http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/nr.1999.3.1.60?prevSearch=allfield%3A(When+Prophecy+Fails+and+Faith+Persists)&searchHistoryKey=
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on June 05, 2009, 04:35:45 AM
Your link is busted, Thornie. Try this instead:
http://caliber.ucpress.net/doi/abs/10.1525/nr.1999.3.1.60?prevSearch=allfield%3A(When+Prophecy+Fails+and+Faith+Persists)&searchHistoryKey=
strange it works on mine
but lately I've been learning that for some reason my computer doesn't follow the rules of the internet
I think my favorite quote thus far is:
QuoteFor people whose lives have become dominated by one powerful expectation,
and whose activities are dictated by what that belief requires, abandonment of
faith because of disappointment about a date would usually be too traumatic
an experience to contemplate. Reinterpretation is demanded.
My Dad practically stated that to me word for word once, but he concluded with:
"But, its obvious the end is coming, the Brothers just misunderstood the way the scriptures should have been translated!"
:horrormirth:
Faith destroys the brain from inside out. :(