In Reply to: Re: Bad Social Science & TF posted by Perry on June 20, 2005 at 20:59:32:
The definition you cite for apostate is perfectly acceptable for social science purposes, but you might want to do some further operational definition.
If I were doing a study that included former members, I would want to make a distinction between people who are hostile and actively oppose TFI and those who are less antagonistic and may be more positively disposed toward TFI. There's a very interesting fringe element that is neither in or out of the group. How would you describe Faith Berg's status? There are a number of people who don't necessarily reject the belief that Berg was a prophet, but reject the leadership "anointing" of Zerby & Peter.
More important, former members such as SGA who were raised in the group and never affiliated or freely confirmed their membership as young adults should not be labeled "apostates." They only "adhered" under duress.
There are different categories of exmembers and "apostate" may not be appropriate to all of them.