Deprogramming from the Academic Cult

The CER has written about the way in which the Ph.D. has become in recent years little more than an apprenticeship for mainstream academia, instead of taking on the wider societal significance that has marked the doctorate out through history. The article "Different routes to the doctorate" is particularly relevant here.

Further food for thought comes in this 1999 article by Margaret Newhouse. Her perspective is more mainstream and less non-traditional than ours. But she nevertheless makes valuable points such as,

"One of the recurring themes from my mail has been about "deprogramming" from the cult that academic research careers are superior to others. Graduate students spend years in a culture that views academic careers as the crème de la crème (this is especially true at elite institutions), and pretty soon they begin to believe it. Not pursuing an academic career can be seen as settling for second best, if not downright failure."

At EAU, our doctoral students are there precisely because they have chosen a path that doesn't fit into mainstream academia. They challenge the cult; and in doing so they redefine its parameters and question its legitimacy. They also question the intellectual basis of a system which - in the time-honored fashion of doctrinaire socialism - relies on patronage rather than on merit.

A further article in the Chronicle of 2004 revisits these issues. The pseudonymous author writes,

"For all its claims to the contrary, graduate education does not seem to enhance the mental freedom of many students, some of whom are psychologically damaged by the experience. As Newhouse suggested -- perhaps more rhetorically than seriously -- graduate school these days seems to have a lot in common with mind-control cults...

For anyone who has been in graduate school, numerous portions of Hassan's outline of the mind-control practices of cults will seem weirdly familiar. Reading through it, your initial tendency may be to laugh out loud. But proceed down the list and the parallels between cults and the experiences of many graduate students can become mildly disturbing.

Hassan calls his outline the "BITE Model," which stands for behavior, information, thought, and emotional control. Let's review a few of the traits of each category and see if any of them sound familiar.

Behavior control: "major time commitment required for indoctrination sessions and group rituals"; "need to ask permission for major decisions"; "need to report thoughts, feelings, and activities to superiors."

Information control: "access to non-cult sources of information minimized or discouraged (keep members so busy they don't have time to think)" and "extensive use of cult-generated information (newsletters, magazines, journals, audio tapes, videotapes, etc.)."

Thought control: "need to internalize the group's doctrine as 'Truth' (black and white thinking; good vs. evil; us vs. them, inside vs. outside)" and "no critical questions about leader, doctrine, or policy seen as legitimate."

Emotional control: "excessive use of guilt (identity guilt: not living up to your potential; social guilt; historical guilt)"; "phobia indoctrination (irrational fears of ever leaving the group or even questioning the leader's authority; cannot visualize a positive, fulfilled future without being in the group; shunning of leave takers; never a legitimate reason to leave"; and "from the group's perspective, people who leave are 'weak,' 'undisciplined.'"

Are you experiencing some shock of recognition? I was particularly startled when I learned that recent college graduates are one of the groups most frequently targeted by cult recruiters."

The writer, himself a mainstream assistant professor, has hit the nail on the head. What he has identified is the tactics of the mainstream academic system as it seeks to preserve and concentrate power in its chosen structures - the tenure system, the campus, the precepts of the teaching unions - and to resist and demonize all external competitive forces. Academic initiates are encouraged to "believe in academia" and to embrace those structures as the price of their initiation.

His comment "What's the difference between indoctrination and professionalization, anyway?" echoes the above in as direct an indictment as could be desired.