|
This article is an electronic version of an article originally
published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1985, Volume 2, Number 1, pages 17-30.
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.
Some New Religions Are Dangerous
Arthur A. Dole, Ph.D., A.B.P.P.
University of Pennsylvania
Steve K. D. Eichel, Ph.D.
RETIRN
Abstract
Some researchers allege that new religions and psychotherapy are functionally
equivalent. Yet many new religions differ from psychotherapy in respect to
dangerousness. A survey of expert cult watchers suggests that documented abuses,
not a rival religion or competing psychotherapy, determine whether a new
religion is described as dangerous. In addition, the trend in psychotherapy is
toward increased concern for ethical and accountable behavior. Finally, the
resistance of new religions to impartial and well designed studies differs
sharply from the free inquiry that characterizes psychotherapy outcome and
process research. Without adequate research, we are forced to rely on the
personal testimonies of former new religionists, many of whom report adverse
effects.
Full text available through
ICSA E-Library.
|
