Tom Cruise - Has infact everyone else gone mad?

[NeilF]

Aliens are more likely than fitting all the animals in the world on a big boat.

LOL!

 

[cleanbluesky]

I watched 'that video' last night - I'm not sure about Tom Cruise going mad, but it appears most other people are!?

OK, he's talking about stuff we are not familiar with (eg: acronyms scientologists would be familiar with etc), and he's passionate and obviously slightly carried away at times about the topic (scientology), but I couldn't see anything particularly odd or worrying in there. And yet seemingly everyone, on the back of the video, are calling him a 'complete loon' or worse...

Then we had 'The Sun' jumping in yesterday with an article showing Tom Cruise making 'another scientology rant'. When you watch the video they posted he's simply at a scientology event getting an award and making quite a polite/simple speech.

Has infact everyone else gone mad? Is this a massive 'emperor's new clothes' syndrome where everyone is simply jumping on board with what the media say they should think about Mr Cruise, rather than actually thinking about it?


All very odd, and a little alarming to be honest!

Some things things he claims are strange i.e. a scientologist being the only one who can help at the scene of an accident - some thing he claims are inaccurate, like scientologists being the authority on pretty much everything and the rest is a bunch of soundbites that don't actually mean anything. Top that off with the fact that people dislike the Cult of Scientology and that explains the reaction

 

[cleanbluesky]

But they never charged for simple religious knowledge. If you go back several hundred years, then there were cases of people leaving their lands to the church due to fear of going to hell, but in recent times, there has been very little exploitation (unless you're going to claim that the collection in church is exploitation), which is very very different from scientology, or most other cults.

I think that's a really important difference that Dolph has highlighted - there is no other religion which charges in order to 'do good' - whereas Scientologists believe their 'auditing' is important and good for people, yet also charge for it

 

[james.miller]

I agree, as much as Scientology is a load of rubbish imo, he has a right to his opinion and he wasn't being that crazy about it, if he was talking about Christianity or Islam no one would dare bash him. But because it is Scientology it is ok.

give over, id call him a nutjob whatever religion he prescribes to. just like those Jew-hating nutjob Nazis. or those western-hating nutjob muslim-extremists.

 

[cleanbluesky]

Now, you may say he just comes across as slightly arrogant, but his statements make specific people feel as though they are inferior and he is using low level psychotherepy methods to persuad the weak minded people that they need to come join him (becuase their lives are negative - and he is the positive).....
Here are some pointers for a psycho analysis of Narcissistic personality disorder which I think is one of the traits he displays in his own headspace :

Not therapy methods, merely psychological exploitation techniques. Therapy exists for the betterment of the client.

 

[cleanbluesky]

As do many of those who have found 'the truth' through atheism. A quick read of Richard Dawkins work will demonstrate all the above, directed at those who do not share his beliefs.

Atheism may not be a religion, but that doesn't stop it's followers behaving in that way

Atheism cannot be 'followed' because it is not a specific doctrine, it is an absence of one. Dawkins is in no way representative of atheism, any more than all the other atheist scientists and authors - none of which do you constantly use the behaviour of to criticism atheism.

 

[Lysander]

Well, for instance, see my earlier point about the difference between knowing where the religious text comes from, and not knowing (although many people assume).

There are also many differences in behaviour (such as most cults tend to be shrouded in secrecy), how they treat people and so on.

Hmm I'm sorry, I'm not buying it. What does knowing where a religious text comes from have to do with it? There are many many religions and branches of religion. Not everyone is going to know offhand what they're all about.

Having been part of a 'cult' myself for many years I actually see no difference in between how the members acted and people of any religion. A religious cult is still based in religion Don't you think Jehovah's witnessers are nutters? They act like it at times but they're just into their religion. So is Tom Cruise. At least you don't see Scientologists doing house calls and shoving their religion down your throat.

 

[Masterdog]

Atheism cannot be 'followed' because it is not a specific doctrine, it is an absence of one. Dawkins is in no way representative of atheism, any more than all the other atheist scientists and authors - none of which do you constantly use the behaviour of to criticism atheism.

Heard a nice quote the other day about atheism. Can't remember it exactly, but it can be summarised as 'Atheism is the rejection of all religious beliefs. Religion is the rejection of all religious beliefs except one.'

 

[Dolph]

Hmm I'm sorry, I'm not buying it. What does knowing where a religious text comes from have to do with it? There are many many religions and branches of religion. Not everyone is going to know offhand what they're all about.

To put it simply, we cannot prove who wrote the bible, whether there was divine intervention involved, whether the events occured and so on. We can assume, but we cannot know.

That is very different to the texts of scientology.

Having been part of a 'cult' myself for many years I actually see no difference in between how the members acted and people of any religion. A religious cult is still based in religion Don't you think Jehovah's witnessers are nutters? They act like it at times but they're just into their religion. So is Tom Cruise. At least you don't see Scientologists doing house calls and shoving their religion down your throat.

We get scientologists in the town centre harrassing people, does that count?

Which 'cult' are you part of?

 

[NeilF]

Some things things he claims are strange i.e. a scientologist being the only one who can help at the scene of an accident - some thing he claims are inaccurate, like scientologists being the authority on pretty much everything and the rest is a bunch of soundbites that don't actually mean anything. Top that off with the fact that people dislike the Cult of Scientology and that explains the reaction

Yes and no...

What's he's possibly suggesting is most people will do nothing, and if someone (he for example) doesn't help then no one will.

How often do you hear of incidents where people are in trouble where absolutely no one helps. Everyone just stands and watches and dp nothing...

It seems they are suggesting that in their ethics, it says they 'must help'... Seems like quite a good ethic to me and one I'd happily live by.


As for their other claims, maybe true, maybe not... I don't care... They're just claims...


Again, keeping on topic. For all the ridiculous claims about how this video makes him look like he's utterly mad, I just cannot see it. Yes he believes in something that seems strange/odd to us, but so what... From all accounts he otherwise seems like one of Hollywoods more sane residents...

 

[Dolph]

Atheism cannot be 'followed' because it is not a specific doctrine, it is an absence of one. Dawkins is in no way representative of atheism, any more than all the other atheist scientists and authors - none of which do you constantly use the behaviour of to criticism atheism.

Atheism, in classical theological or philosphical terms, is the expressed disbelief in God(s), or denial of God(s). (if you want the specific modern definition, explicit weak atheism). Simple lack of belief isn't enough to qualify as an atheist. (The difference between saying 'I don't share your belief' and 'I don't believe you')

As that stance cannot be proven or demonstrated by evidence (or confirmed lack of evidence), it is a faith based stance, and it's also a fairly specific doctrine in that regard, generally (mis)using the scientific method to claim absence of evidence is equivilent to evidence of absence.

 

[Lysander]

We get scientologists in the town centre harrassing people, does that count?

Hmm I've never seen that. Harrassing people or just promoting their religion? What form does the harrassment take?

Which 'cult' are you part of?

I used to be in this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Economic_Science

Cult or not? Some people certainly thought so. Scroll down to the section on 'criticism'. A 'cult' is a derogatory term other people use, never the religion or school itself. The Scientologoists just think of themselves as a Church.

 

[sansnom]

We mock cruise and scientology not because of what the media says but because to any normal person it is infact so utterly ridiculous. "we are the only ones that can help" Talk about illusions of grandeur.

To reach the upper echelons of enlightenment you must donate between $300,000 to $500,000. - Yes because this sounds completely reasonable and is really trying for the betterment of humanity.

I found this article interesting too.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3345139.ece

Seems more like a gang of thugs proclaiming nonsense, inflating their stats and coercing/extorting money from those unlucky enough to be caught in its grip and one more thing, let's not forget it's founder "The source" was a sci-fi writer in the 50's. It's just unbelievable that people even give this tosh a moment's notice let alone have pathetic hollywood celebrities endorsing it and putting a public face on it for youngsters all over the world.

 

[Heliospherez]

The reason cruise come across as such a nice guy is because he is benefiting financially from it (and is a good celeb in the sense that he understands him being generally nice, will sell more movies and gain more fans - more monies)

If you read Andre Tabayoyon's affidavit after he left the Scientology cult (and former head of Security for the church compound)

http://www.whyaretheydead.net/krasel/aff_at.html

You will see that :

"members were only allowed to talk to Cruise if he talked to them first, Cruise had to "originate the communications." Those that violated this rule were given "conditioning."

Cruise specifically asked not to be spoken to & this rule stated that 800+ people had to bow down to his holiness when he entered Gilman Hot Springs compound.

Nice guy eh....without a superiority complex ?

 

[Lysander]

We mock cruise and scientology not because of what the media says but because to any normal person it is infact so utterly ridiculous. "we are the only ones that can help" Talk about illusions of grandeur.

How is that different from any other religion?

 

[Stan_Lite]

Atheism cannot be 'followed' because it is not a specific doctrine, it is an absence of one.

I disagree.

The definition of doctrine is:
1. A principle or body of principles presented for acceptance or belief, as by a religious, political, scientific, or philosophic group; dogma.

The definition of atheism is:
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

I would say that atheism fits quite nicely into the definition of a doctrine. The denial of the existence of a God (or supreme being if you prefer) and the proposition of such a doctrine for consideration by others could constitute a basic religion.

 

[Dolph]

Hmm I've never seen that. Harrassing people or just promoting their religion? What form does the harrassment take?

I've had them trying to stop me walking past because I refuse to take their test (trying to surround me and herd me back). The ones down here can be very agressive in their desire to help. YMMV

I used to be in this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_of_Economic_Science

Cult or not? Some people certainly thought so. Scroll down to the section on 'criticism'. A 'cult' is a derogatory term other people use, never the religion or school itself. The Scientologoists just think of themselves as a Church.

I would say not, reading through that wiki page. But I'd probably have to find more information to make a full judgement.

 

[Dolph]

Just as reference, here's a thread in SC on atheism. It's a bit of a long one (over 1000 posts) and it's still going, but I can see we will cover some of the same ground

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17812372

 

[JaFFa]

You steal men's souls and make them your slaves!

Perhaps the same could be said of all religions....

But enough.. Have at you!

 

[NeilF]

The reason cruise come across as such a nice guy is because he is benefiting financially from it (and is a good celeb in the sense that he understands him being generally nice, will sell more movies and gain more fans - more monies)

If you read Andre Tabayoyon's affidavit after he left the Scientology cult (and former head of Security for the church compound)

http://www.whyaretheydead.net/krasel/aff_at.html

You will see that :

"members were only allowed to talk to Cruise if he talked to them first, Cruise had to "originate the communications." Those that violated this rule were given "conditioning."

Cruise specifically asked not to be spoken to & this rule stated that 800+ people had to bow down to his holiness when he entered Gilman Hot Springs compound.

Nice guy eh....without a superiority complex ?

So you put more faith in what you've read (by someone who may or may not have an agenda themselves), than what you have seen first-hand yourself, and what I've told other people have witness first-hand on a day to day basis when working with Cruise?