|
In Reply to: Re: my 2 cents about the Hartingdons posted by excog on December 03, 2005 at 00:08:26:
I think this might be the article you're referring to. It's a continuation of the debate contained in the book co-edited by Zablocki, Misunderstanding Cults. Here's the abstract and link to the article:
"Methodological Fallacies in Anthony's Critique of Exit Cost Analysis"
Abstract
This article consists of a point-by-point rebuttal of Dick Anthony’s critique (Anthony, 2001) of my theory of cultic brainwashing (Zablocki, 2001). Anthony’s argument is first reduced to the 98 distinct propositions that he presents in Zablocki & Robbins (2001). The assumption is that, if there is validity to his critique, some of these propositions must satisfy all of the following three criteria: (1) they must dispute some aspect of my theory; (2) they must be relevant to the specific arguments made in my theory; and (3) they must be factually correct. Surprisingly, it is shown that none of Anthony’s 98 propositions is successful in meeting all three of these fundamental criteria. It is therefore concluded that Anthony’s critique does not meet the minimal requirements needed for a successful attempt to invalidate a theory.
http://www.csj.org/infoserv_profile/zablocki_benjamin.htm
