Pieper’s translation of leisure is reflected as the peak of human life. It is the interaction between desire and work. The etymology of leisure dates back to the early 14^th century; initially, it resonated with “the permission to pursue something” (Glare 1982). His clarification of leisure reveals the foundation of culture;  culture itself is based on leisure, because what differs from one culture to another is how things are done, what is done, and why it is done. The why of things is embedded in the etymology of cult: in the mid-17^th century, the use of this word introduced a particular form or system of worship (Hall, 1873).

Pieper writes that culture and leisure share a symbiotic relationship, rather than a cause-and-effect one, but that both “are rooted in divine worship” (Pieper, 1998). If leisure is the basis of culture, this means that what we decide to do with our free time reflects our collective identity. However, he explains that if leisure is not rooted in divine worship, it becomes laziness. All cultures are rooted in religion, beliefs, values, norms, and rites; some are less complicated than others, and some are more ancient than others. People have historically sought meaning and purpose in life through the creation of spiritual or religious beliefs.

Returning to the etymological definitions, what is culture? In the mid-15^th century, this word described the cultivation of agriculture. The discovery of agriculture allowed humans to settle and diversify their way of survival from hunting and gathering to planting and harvesting. However, the concept did not only apply to plants and trees. Cultivation became a tool to implement traits of a certain group onto another group, a strategy used to penetrate and manipulate certain beliefs, originally created by anthropologists to colonise countries (Cicero, 2002). This, however, is not the aim of this paper; rather, we want to clarify that cult (sacred beliefs) and culture (cultivation of the mind) are connected by an umbilical cord.

A cult is defined as “a relatively small group of people having beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister, or as exercising excessive control over members”(Pakosta, 2025). A cult is usually led by one leader (although multiple leaders may exist) and can be religious, political, or sexual in nature. A cult can be beneficial, giving, and awakening, but it balances itself with taking tangible and abstract possessions, brainwashing minds, and placing people on autopilot.

We all go through weak phases, and statistics show that people in certain states are more prone to joining a cult, such as being vulnerable physically, psychologically, or spiritually. Such individuals may be searching for a place to belong, to forget, or to feel safe. Research shows that most cult members are smart, come from middle-class backgrounds, and do not necessarily suffer from psychological illnesses (Singer & Lalich, 1995).

A leader is a person who guides, who is responsible for an idea, a vision, a mission, and the direction and achievement of objectives. Leaders guide the thoughts and beliefs of their followers. This could resemble many types of groups, including political parties, religions, movements, and communities. As noted, “all traditional religions, which most of us still don’t think of as cults, show cult-like tendencies of idolising leaders and preventing independent thought” (Deikman, 2006).

So, what makes a cult different from these groups? Margaret Thaler Singer, a psychologist specializing in mind control, identifies six conditions that characterize cult leadership. First, keeping the individual unaware that there is an agenda to control or change them. Second, dominating their social and physical environment, particularly by regulating time. Third, creating a sense of powerlessness, fear, and neediness. Fourth, to inhibit behavior relating to personal identity. Fifth, implementing a system of rewards, punishments, and experiences in such a way as to promote learning of the group’s ideology and approved behaviours. Lastly, creating a closed system of logic and an authoritarian permanent structure. Cult leaders demand loyalty and obedience and govern through authoritarian doctrines, claiming that “special” knowledge and divine revelation guide them.

While the main reason people connect to a cult is the belief that it will provide a better quality of life and offer safety and belonging, they tend to regard the leader as a savior. In such cases, it doesn’t matter whether the leader makes moral or ethical decisions; followers may continue to obey even when those decisions contradict initial values. These are referred to as initial values because, after entering a cult, individuals may abandon their beliefs, thoughts, ideologies, possessions, family ties, and anything related to autonomy.

Such reliance creates a lack of accountability and responsibility, where participants in a group consider themselves merely following orders. However, some individuals are able to detach themselves from the group and make independent judgments; in such cases, they are often cast out. Deikman states four characteristics commonly applied to adults who take part in a cult:

1. Compliance with the group

2. Dependence on a leader

3. Avoidance of dissent

4. Devaluation of outsiders (Deikman, 2006)

It is common to believe that we are not affected by cults. However, Deikman demonstrated that some patterns characterising cults are found in many kinds of human activities, “including the military, politics, religion, sport, psychotherapy, academia, entertainment, education, and training” (Deikman, 2006).

We will now examine some mind-control techniques defined by the aforementioned physician and psychiatrist:

• • • Peer group pressure: found in collective settings. For example, individuals may ignore a mugging incident if they are in a crowd that also ignores it.

    • Love bombing: often found in intimate or group relationships where one experiences intense attention, affection, and the feeling of belonging.

    • Hypnosis: creating a state of high suggestibility through trance-inducing techniques.

    • Rejection of old values: encouraging individuals to erase personal values in order to accept a new lifestyle.

    • Confusion: promoting blindness through the rejection of logic and manipulation through the media.

    • Metacommunication: infiltrating subliminal messages by trending key words or expressions in speeches or lectures.

    • Removal of privacy: personal and distinctive identities become diminished and exposed to the public.

    • Isolation: losing the sense of original reality, such as through physical separation from loved ones.

Such factors are found everywhere. Human nature is perceived by many cultures as divinely inspired, exhibiting an image of moral rightness and worth. Freedom appears when control is handled by oneself; however, the mind is a tricky instrument. The food we eat shapes our thoughts and health, the people we surround ourselves with affect our principles, and fear drives us either to thrive in a sky of colours or to dive into an ocean of darkness. A cult is not just a weird group led by a self-interested leader; rather, cult-like structures smoothly move around us like oxygen.

References

• • Pieper, J. (1998). Leisure: The basis of culture. South Bend, IN: St. Augustine’s Press. (Original work published 1948).

  • Pakosta, A. (2025, June 6). Cults: The exploitation and abuse of vulnerable individuals. Human Rights Research Center. https://www.humanrightsresearch.org/post/cults-the-exploitation-and-abuse-of-vulnerable-individuals

  • Singer, M. T., & Lalich, J. (1995). Cults in our midst: The hidden menace in our everyday lives. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  • Deikman, A. J. (2006). Them and US – cult thinking and the terrorist threat. Bay Tree Publishing

  • Etymonline sources

  • Hall, F. (1873). Modern English. New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co.

  • Cicero. (2002). Tusculan Disputations (J. E. King, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published c. 45 BCE).

  • Glare, P. G. W. (Ed.). (1982). Oxford Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.