Assess the View That Cults and Sects Are Only Fringe Organisations That Are Inevitably Short Lived and of Little Influence in Contemporary Society Essay

It can be argued that cults and sects are only charge organisations that are inevitably short lived and of small-minded shape in contemporary parliamentary procedure, however slightly may bedevil views to contrast this idea. A sect is an organization, which ordinarily breaks off from an established religion, which finds itself in deviation with beliefs and values of wider golf club and refuses to tolerate the beliefs of other(a)s. Although the desire to be a member is voluntary, as oppose to beingness born into, homogeneous religion, sects are rejected by decree and claim strong obligation and dedication by its members.A sect is an extremely narrow-minded organisation, which is often led by a magnetised draw. Whereas, in contrast, a cult does non progress from a mainstream religion and does not reject or challenge societal norms. However, as tolerant of other beliefs as they are, they still attract a salient deal of negative press, for example brainwashing. Members in a cult are usually more like customers than followers. An example of a cult is Heavens gate, which is a destructive doomsday cult, centered in California. in that location is a mass of animationing licence that cults and sects are short lived and insignificant to wider society. Nevertheless, it must be maintain that the matter is complex as thither are many sects and cults, which identify themselves differently.There is prove to support this view of a short-lived nature of sects. This is due to many reasons. World rejecting sects, due to their nature and succeed societal rejection and stigma of bad press, must be able to compromise with society and becoming a denomination and therefore cease to be a sect, if this is not d genius then the sect exit go on out. There is also an argument that sects cannot have a great deal of affect upon society over a long term period as they cannot survive past the charismatic leaders lifetime and therefore sustain themselves over more than one generation.The American theologian Niebuhr theorises that other reason for transience of sects is that they rarely live past the 1st generation because the 2nd generation usually lacks the belief of the 1st. In this way, theirmembership dwindles as the 2nd generation chooses to leave the sect and hold other views in wider society.However Wilson disagrees with Neibuhrs view and says that he overates his case and chooses to not pay attention to groups who did preserve a distinct sectarian stance. Similarly, evidence proves to discredit the belief that a sect fails to live on past their leaders death. For example, The Mormons have continued for many generations and also the Amish- however this could be attributed to the cautionary isolation-like in which they live. There is also a possibility that the Moonies surviving is due to the leader preparing for his son to oblige over his position as the charismatic leader after his death, however this is yet to be seen.Cults have seen a large incline in their number recently and because they are more accepting of wider society and despite receiving bad press, advise a practical solution to peoples issues and wishes, seem less likely to die out due to refusal and disapproval. They are also financially rather stable, the Church of Scientology for example has an estimated income of over 200m per year. This is down in the mouth to the consumer attitude of cults. There is also a mass of evidence for their importance in society in a sense that audience cults have a mass market of self help therapy there are many books available for example, tarot reading, crystals and reflexology regularly appear on the best seller dip and often more room is devoted to these books rather than Christianity books themselves. The view that cults are fringe movements is less support than that for sects.Sects very infrequently continue on as sects but cults such as scientology are not only prosperous but also have a huge celebrity follow ing mode admired by the public for example Tom Cruise.There is also evidence that sects and cults can be of great influence to society though it is debatable as to whether or not that is possible straight off in a society as apparently secular as ours. Weber suggests in his Theodicy of Disprivilege that because they offer a solution to problems justification and explanation for life and its problems, to marginalisedgroups such as dropouts or ethnic minorities, realness rejecting sects that offer status appeal to people. An example of this is Liberation Theology which was for the poorer people which had great influence upon the priorities of the Catholic Church in Latin America (though it has become more conservative, it continues to represent human rights and democracy).Bruce argues that it is not a religion and is instead a shallow, meaningless thing. Due to the elements of choice it offers, the choice about which bits to believe and whether to urinate its readings into accoun t, it does not require commitment. This he argues prevents it having religious status. Post Modernists see it as being spiritual shop it is part of a consumerist culture. Despite not necessarily being a religion, there is lots of evidence to show that it has influenced society as a whole and, nigh sociologists would claim, aided secularisation. There is also evidence to show that it is unlikely to be particularly short lived as it fits in so well with our Capitalist, consumerist society and our individualistic values and is so profitable.Therefore, though there is strong evidence to show that sects and cults are fringe organisations, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that neither are short lived in themselves either through with(predicate) the Sectarian cycle or demand and supply (though sects tend to become denominations) and also to suggest that the influence of sects and cults on society is greater than expected though the influence of sects and cults is exemplified by ol der examples and so one cannot be sure as to how successful they will be in todays society, nevertheless in regards to specific sects and cults.In conclusion, the view that cults, sects are fringe organisations that are inevitably short-lived and of little influence in modern-day society, is on the whole not wholly correct but has some strength in that the permanency of all is arguable as is their status as fringe organisations.