Well, here's to grumpy old, out of touch, 'don't get it' academics!

By insisting on a few of the basics of academic life (share nicely,  
don't mess with terminology without good reason, use clear  
definitions, back up claims with argument and evidence etc etc) the  
members of Phd Design seem to have provoked you, Mr VanPlatter, into a  
most revealing statement. I have seldom been privileged to witness  
such a collection of cultic language-games and passive/aggressive  
dominance strategies outside of say, scientology or NLP.

All the old favourites are there:

Inventing or co-opting terminology and then using it as a gatekeeper/ 
shibboleth. (Eg: use our language to discuss things or its evidence  
that you 'don't get it')

Making implied claims to esoteric wisdom that can only be revealed to  
participants in cult rituals ('Get your ass into a co-creation  
seminar').

Implying that said wisdom is too refined and subtle for the cruder  
methods of cruder minds to understand, and which must therefore only  
be judged by the criteria defined by those who hold it.

Implications of exclusiveness, that in turn are designed to imply the  
quality of whatever is accessible within the 'magic circle of consent'  
operated by the cult. ("We made an exception for Gunnar")

Patronising the uninitiated and 'unenlightened'.

Ad hominem attacks on those who dare to criticise.


. . . It's a weary old list of hoary and ancient weapons against  
shared understanding.

It's why we have academic rigour, and critical thinking, and standards  
of transparency in the presentation of arguments and sources. Yes  
academic critical thinking is a language game too, but it is one  
designed to guard against exactly the list of (excuse my language, but  
I follow your example Mr VanPlatten,) 'mind-fucks' given above.

Now I do not mean to imply that the content of the esoteric wisdom of  
cults is necessarily without value, simply because it is presented in  
the cultic gift-wrap. I have, on rare occasions found the odd useful  
snippet in both Scientology and NLP, although it is usually the case  
that claims for originality are doubtful and that these things can  
also be found elsewhere. So I welcome heartily the collection of links  
to 'scripture' presented at the end of the post.

It may be a while before I get time to give these my proper attention,  
as I am myself the busy leader of a very important and world changing  
cult (membership exactly one - nobody else is cool enough to join :-).  
When I do however, I will be looking with interest to see whether the  
cultic language patterns are continued, and whether there is something  
genuinely useful concealed therein.

It may be that it is all solid gold stuff, but after reading your post  
MrVanPlatten, my woo-meter is set to maximum gain. Frankly, if you  
really are influential in guiding change in my world, then regardless  
of the quality of your ideas, its you I want fired and damn quickly  
too, as you appear to have, by the language of your post, a bad case  
of high priesthood.

And yes, I play hardball with cults.

Andrew J King







"We are cool, you are not"

"We are the future, we matter, you are out of date and out of touch