Hypnosis Does Not Exist

[gone]

I got bored half way through reading what you'd wrote. this because you believe a book???
WTF? A book is another persons account of a subject.. Jesus Christ.. You state hypnosis exist because someone said it does IN A BOOK?? FFS..
I'm done now, I can't seriously believe people are so gullible to believe what people tell them verbally is true and what they read in a book is true. Until you've experienced it YOURSELF don't even bother to comment here.. This is why hypnosis DOES NOT EXIST..

Have people not read the thread before posting here? Is that not IGNORNACE. surely they wouldn't post such nonsense had they read the content. They are still using the testimonies of others, as proof of their own belief.. Quite something.

[harrison]

a quote from a book entitled- Medical and dental hypnosis, by John Hartland B.Sc., M.B.., Ch.B., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P.
consulting psychiatrist, formerly visiting psychiatrist hallam hospital, president of the british society of medical and dental hypnosis, life president of the midlands branch of the british society for medical and dental hypnosis, honorary fellow of the american society of clinical hypnosis, fellow of the international society for clinical and experimental hypnosis, editor of the british journal opf clinical hypnosis
page 150-
somnambulism.
all kinds of sense-delusions can be produced in deep hypnotic states, many of which are so remarkable that anyone seeing them for the first time may well be excused for doubting the reality of the phenomena. in everyday life we all depend so completly upon our sense organs that it seemes incredible that a few words or phrases can succeed in placing the hypnotic subject in entirely different surroundings. but before many phenomena such as these can be elcited, a very deep or even somnambulistic trance is usually essential. somnambulism is generally considered to be one of the deepest stages of hypnosis, and one of the most reliable tests of this condition is to cause the subject to open his eyes without awakening from his trance. he will be able to see quite clearly, to talk and to walk about whilst still remaing deeply hypnotized, and will continue to carry out all the suggestions made to him by the hypnotist. if suggestions of alertness are made to him he will become just as wide awake as in a normal state. indeed it can sometimes be very difficult to tell whether a good somnambule is actually in a hypnotic state or not as estabrooks pointed out possibly the only criterion by which this may be judged is the extent to which the subject will respond to suggestion. other tests of somnambulism are found in the subjects ability to produce hallucinations , to establish anaesthesia to pain, and to produce complete amnesia for the events of thr trance state.

[harrison]

I got bored half way through reading what you'd wrote. this because you believe a book???
WTF? A book is another persons account of a subject.. Jesus Christ.. You state hypnosis exist because someone said it does IN A BOOK?? FFS..
I'm done now, I can't seriously believe people are so gullible to believe what people tell them verbally is true and what they read in a book is true. Until you've experienced it YOURSELF don't even bother to comment here.. This is why hypnosis DOES NOT EXIST..

Have people not read the thread before posting here? Is that not IGNORNACE. surely they wouldn't post such nonsense had they read the content. They are still using the testimonies of others, as proof of their own belief.. Quite something.

not only my belief, but also from my experiences of being hypnotized.

[harrison]

Medical and dental hypnosis page 13- the nature of hypnosis,
hypnosis is essentially a particular state of mind which is usually induced in one person by another. it is a state of mind in which suggestions are not only more readily accepted than in the waking state, but are also acted upon much more powerfully than would be possible under normal conditions. in other words, the hypnotic state is always accompanied by an increase in the suggestibility of the subject.
in the hypnotic state the power of criticism is either fully or partially suppressed. to understand how this occurs we must first accept the concept of the unconscious mind. this postulates that in everyone there is a portion of the mind that is constantly influencing our thoughts and behaviour, the existence of which we are normally unaware. under certain circumstances it can undertake most of the functions of the conscious mind, with one important exception- the power of criticism.
suggestions are therefore not only more readily accepted, but are also realized to the fullest possible extent during the hypnotic state since direct access is gained to the unconscious part of the mind. when suggestions by-pass the conscious mind, as they do under hypnosis, they penetrate directly to the unconscious mind which, being able to exercise little or no power of criticism, is quite unable to reject them, and the individual is bound to act upon them. if we look at an iceberg we know that we can see only one eighth of its total bulk above the surface of the waves, seven eighths is hidden from sight. what we do when we start to induce hypnosis is to cause the iceberg to topple over, so that the hidden seven eighths rises above the surface and the visible one eighth disappears. in other words, the unconscious mind rises to the surface, becomes more accessible, and eventually assumes temporay control.
when the iceberg becomes completely reversed, the result will be very deep hypnosis or somnambulism. in this case the conscious mind will have sunk completely below the surface and will be completely inactive. the unconscious mind will have temporarily assumed control and the power of criticism will be removed altogether.

[gone]

If that is a quote from a book I must ask "Are you not listening" because surely no one is that stupid!

[sakoz]

harrison, the book, "Open To Suggestion" intriques me. Does it 'cover' beliefs the way I do? ( see my post "Emotions Are Involuntary Reactions...)
Amazon had four used copies, starting at fifty-two dollars. I don't want to spend that much without examining the contents of any book; or told , to my satisfaction, that it's worth that much to me.

Subliminal beliefs are as compelling as instincts, they can be considered 'twins' ( we can include hypnotic suggestions, and have 'triplets').
Instincts are 'hard-wired', but beliefs are 'software', they can be replaced or at least 'neutralized of emotional charge'. One may never forget a trauma, but one can stop reliving it as if the memory was the 'real' replication over and over each time the memory is accessed.  The images are like photos (not real). We may not like to admit our amygdala is so primitive, it can't tell  the difference between a real perception and a fake.
Most of us are 'fooled' by counterfeit money, so why expect more of your amygdala?

[SWM]

@Sakoz

Michael Yapko has written a brilliant introduction to hypnosis called tranceworks it is aimed at professionals already experienced in psychology or psychotherapy but can be understood as easily by the layperson. much of the book is available to read online link follows.

if you want to buy a book about hypnosis this is by far the best for learning the basics.

http://books.google.com/books?id=uYKaMWAfcewC&printsec=frontcover&dq=tranceworks&hl=en&ei=uDttTd7kJYiGhQf8mdSPDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

[sakoz]

Thanks SWM.
                     If you read any of my posts, you'll see that what I been calling; "unwittingly believing" and 'mistaking some of our images for real' are virtually 'unrecognized' self-hypnosis or 'waking hypnosis'.
I would go so far as to say that the placebo effect, the unwittingly believing the fake pills are real, qualifies as 'waking hypnosis'.
We are virtually 'conditioned' to and by language. Conditioning is "related" to hypnosis.
I see there's some "squabbling" about whether 'Hypnosis" exits or not. I been posting about the same 'phenomenon' without arousing any "wrath". What a difference words/names make.

[SWM]

the squabbling in this thread is due to a lack of understanding of what hypnosis is by some of the members involved in the discussion. i agree with your other points on belief and placebo etc, you will find this discussed in Yapko's book.

there is also a chapter on langauge as a conditioning stimuli, the conditioned response to words, something which you obviously recognise already.

[harrison]

harrison, the book, "Open To Suggestion" intriques me. Does it 'cover' beliefs the way I do? ( see my post "Emotions Are Involuntary Reactions...)
Amazon had four used copies, starting at fifty-two dollars. I don't want to spend that much without examining the contents of any book; or told , to my satisfaction, that it's worth that much to me.

Subliminal beliefs are as compelling as instincts, they can be considered 'twins' ( we can include hypnotic suggestions, and have 'triplets').
Instincts are 'hard-wired', but beliefs are 'software', they can be replaced or at least 'neutralized of emotional charge'. One may never forget a trauma, but one can stop reliving it as if the memory was the 'real' replication over and over each time the memory is accessed.  The images are like photos (not real). We may not like to admit our amygdala is so primitive, it can't tell  the difference between a real perception and a fake.
Most of us are 'fooled' by counterfeit money, so why expect more of your amygdala?

I don't think there is anything in the book to compare with those beliefs. the book is not a textbook of how to hypnotize someone, but a compilation of case histories, world-wide over many years and a  huge amount of research has been put into writing it. did you know, for example, the story of svengali and trilby, although fiction, was based on the author's experience of watching a subject covertly hypnotised and humiliated in an amnesic trance. I would reccomend buying it at that price.

[harrison]

the squabbling in this thread is due to a lack of understanding of what hypnosis is by some of the members involved in the discussion. i agree with your other points on belief and placebo etc, you will find this discussed in Yapko's book.

there is also a chapter on langauge as a conditioning stimuli, the conditioned response to words, something which you obviously recognise already.

after being hypnotized myself many times to somnambulism, I think hypnotism is very misunderstood and the only real way to understand it is to be hypnotized. only about 10% can be hypnotized that deeply which is why most people do not believe it. I think the expression placebo effect is irrelevant because a placebo is given to a person in normal consciousness and someone can consciously decieve themselves. someone in a deep trance is under the influence of the unconscious mind, which does not know what is real or not real, so the suggestions are carried out. from my experience, its like being in a dream which you are acting out, but like a dream the memory of it can be gone on awakening.

[harrison]

I'm posting this and hope common sense will penetrate a few people.

Over 10 years ago I concluded from years of study, observations, experiments & research in psychology, magic & mentalism that hypnosis doesn't exist. It is social psychology & belief & ignorance only that have projected hypnosis into society.

Beliefs are very powerful and can not be penetrated with anything including common sense, logic, evidence. I gave up a long time ago trying to tell people hypnosis doesn't exist. People would get angry at me & use other peoples experiences as proof of their own beliefs ie: 'My sister had hypnotherapy to give up smoking and it worked' or 'My cousin was hypnotised on stage & I saw him' or 'My friend is studying hypnotherapy at college so it must be real'. They get defensive, abusive, verging on the violent & I'm not the confrontational type :-) but they don't realise THEY'RE GIVING MY 2ND HAND ACCOUNTS AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN BELIEFS. This is one way they justify it, another is to say 'When you are driving or watching TV or in class and you suddenly realise where you are' well again that isn't being hypnotised, that's concentration, or lack of it, or daydreaming or not focusing attention. Note: Not hypnotised.

Hypnosis has become embed into our culture and accepted as the norm, yet it's a ridiculous set of ideas that have exploited every avenue possible. Even promising hair regrowth to those follically challenged. Hypnosis is a crock of shit, there are other less ambiguous forces at work (ROLE PLAY AND SOCIAL PRESSURE for one) which is a subject of it's own.

Few people know where hypnosis originated. It began with


Franz Anton Mezmer -  who invented (animal magnetism) and other spiritual forces - Mesmer expounded on certain tides in the human body that might be accounted for by the movements of the sun and moon amongst many other quack ideas which were often grouped together as mesmerism. The evolution of Mesmer's ideas and practices led Scottish surgeon James Braid to develop hypnosis in 1842. Mesmer's name is the root of the English verb "mesmerize".

James Braid - changed his sleep based theory to a psychological one stating that : "The various theories at present entertained regarding the phenomena of mesmerism may be arranged thus:— First, those who believe them to be owing entirely to a system of collusion and delusion; and a great majority of society may be ranked under this head. Second, those who believe them to be real phenomena, but produced solely by imagination, sympathy, and imitation. Third, the animal magnetists, or those who believe in some magnetic medium set in motion as the exciting cause of the mesmeric phenomena. Fourth, those who have adopted my views, that the phenomena are solely attributable to a peculiar physiological state of the brain and the spinal cord." 

Marquis de Puységur (1751–1825), was a French aristocrat from one of the most illustrious families of the French nobility, he is now remembered as one of the pre-scientific founders of hypnotism (then known as animal magnetism, or Mesmerism).[1]

I believe in the existence within myself of a power.
From this belief derives my will to exert it.
The entire doctrine of Animal Magnetism is contained in the two words: Believe and Want.
I believe that I have the power to set into action the vital principle of my fellow-men;
I want to make use of it; this is all my science and all my means.
Believe and want, Sirs, and you will do as much as I.

– Marquis de Puységur[


James Braid - changed his sleep based theory to a psychological one stating that : "The various theories at present entertained regarding the phenomena of mesmerism may be arranged thus:— First, those who believe them to be owing entirely to a system of collusion and delusion; and a great majority of society may be ranked under this head. Second, those who believe them to be real phenomena, but produced solely by imagination, sympathy, and imitation. Third, the animal magnetists, or those who believe in some magnetic medium set in motion as the exciting cause of the mesmeric phenomena. Fourth, those who have adopted my views, that the phenomena are solely attributable to a peculiar physiological state of the brain and the spinal cord."

Very few people at that time beleived in his phenomena which he theorised and concluded was a 'perculiar physiological state of the brain and spinal cord"..  This was hypnosis do you beleive that?

No and not many others did either, which is why it died a death and was forgot about until.

UNTIL

This century Milton Erickson revived it.
Erickson's work on hypnotism was controversial during his lifetime and has remained so to the present day. Some of his central presuppositions have been questioned by other researchers and the opaque nature of his explanations has led to a variety of competing interpretations of his approach.
A friend and colleague of Erickson, the hypnosis researcher André Weitzenhoffer, a prolific and well-respected author in the field of hypnosis himself, has extensively criticised the ideas and influence of Erickson in various writings, such as his textbook The Practice of Hypnotism.[17]
The author Jeffrey Masson dedicated a whole sub-section of his book Against Therapy to criticism of Milton Erickson.[18] Masson questions the accuracy of Erickson's case reports. Regarding Erickson's report of a female patient who was allegedly hypnotised to have spontaneous orgasms throughout the day, Masson writes, "The whole thing is tinged with fantasy and has a feeling of unreality about it." [19]

There is a brief history of the origins of hypnosis. Research the names further. Then research:
Social complance in hypnosis
Penn & teller bullshit hypnosis
Graham Wagstaff psychologist hypnosis
Hypnosis does not exist

Then observe some youtube videos and it becomes obvious stage hypnosis is 'role playing' - social compliance.
Then try telling someone hypnosis doesn't exist and anticipate the hostility you'll recieve and the ridiculous evidence people present to justify their belief, which they've never questioned before.. See how you go.. It's fun.







But will just add a quick analogy here: There was a time when people believed Uri Gellar really did bend spoons with the power of his mind.
We come to 'believe' not through choice but desire. One day people will desire reason, rather than the ridiculous, I'm hopeful.

Video reference: Wikipedia, The Magic Café, The Independent, Liverpool University, amongst other stuff, sound from soundjay.

I'm posting this and hope common sense will penetrate a few people.

Over 10 years ago I concluded from years of study, observations, experiments & research in psychology, magic & mentalism that hypnosis doesn't exist. It is social psychology & belief & ignorance only that have projected hypnosis into society.

Beliefs are very powerful and can not be penetrated with anything including common sense, logic, evidence. I gave up a long time ago trying to tell people hypnosis doesn't exist. People would get angry at me & use other peoples experiences as proof of their own beliefs ie: 'My sister had hypnotherapy to give up smoking and it worked' or 'My cousin was hypnotised on stage & I saw him' or 'My friend is studying hypnotherapy at college so it must be real'. They get defensive, abusive, verging on the violent & I'm not the confrontational type :-) but they don't realise THEY'RE GIVING MY 2ND HAND ACCOUNTS AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR OWN BELIEFS. This is one way they justify it, another is to say 'When you are driving or watching TV or in class and you suddenly realise where you are' well again that isn't being hypnotised, that's concentration, or lack of it, or daydreaming or not focusing attention. Note: Not hypnotised.

Hypnosis has become embed into our culture and accepted as the norm, yet it's a ridiculous set of ideas that have exploited every avenue possible. Even promising hair regrowth to those follically challenged. Hypnosis is a crock of shit, there are other less ambiguous forces at work (ROLE PLAY AND SOCIAL PRESSURE for one) which is a subject of it's own.

Few people know where hypnosis originated. It began with


Franz Anton Mezmer -  who invented (animal magnetism) and other spiritual forces - Mesmer expounded on certain tides in the human body that might be accounted for by the movements of the sun and moon amongst many other quack ideas which were often grouped together as mesmerism. The evolution of Mesmer's ideas and practices led Scottish surgeon James Braid to develop hypnosis in 1842. Mesmer's name is the root of the English verb "mesmerize".

James Braid - changed his sleep based theory to a psychological one stating that : "The various theories at present entertained regarding the phenomena of mesmerism may be arranged thus:— First, those who believe them to be owing entirely to a system of collusion and delusion; and a great majority of society may be ranked under this head. Second, those who believe them to be real phenomena, but produced solely by imagination, sympathy, and imitation. Third, the animal magnetists, or those who believe in some magnetic medium set in motion as the exciting cause of the mesmeric phenomena. Fourth, those who have adopted my views, that the phenomena are solely attributable to a peculiar physiological state of the brain and the spinal cord." 

Marquis de Puységur (1751–1825), was a French aristocrat from one of the most illustrious families of the French nobility, he is now remembered as one of the pre-scientific founders of hypnotism (then known as animal magnetism, or Mesmerism).[1]

I believe in the existence within myself of a power.
From this belief derives my will to exert it.
The entire doctrine of Animal Magnetism is contained in the two words: Believe and Want.
I believe that I have the power to set into action the vital principle of my fellow-men;
I want to make use of it; this is all my science and all my means.
Believe and want, Sirs, and you will do as much as I.

– Marquis de Puységur[


James Braid - changed his sleep based theory to a psychological one stating that : "The various theories at present entertained regarding the phenomena of mesmerism may be arranged thus:— First, those who believe them to be owing entirely to a system of collusion and delusion; and a great majority of society may be ranked under this head. Second, those who believe them to be real phenomena, but produced solely by imagination, sympathy, and imitation. Third, the animal magnetists, or those who believe in some magnetic medium set in motion as the exciting cause of the mesmeric phenomena. Fourth, those who have adopted my views, that the phenomena are solely attributable to a peculiar physiological state of the brain and the spinal cord."

Very few people at that time beleived in his phenomena which he theorised and concluded was a 'perculiar physiological state of the brain and spinal cord"..  This was hypnosis do you beleive that?

No and not many others did either, which is why it died a death and was forgot about until.

UNTIL

This century Milton Erickson revived it.
Erickson's work on hypnotism was controversial during his lifetime and has remained so to the present day. Some of his central presuppositions have been questioned by other researchers and the opaque nature of his explanations has led to a variety of competing interpretations of his approach.
A friend and colleague of Erickson, the hypnosis researcher André Weitzenhoffer, a prolific and well-respected author in the field of hypnosis himself, has extensively criticised the ideas and influence of Erickson in various writings, such as his textbook The Practice of Hypnotism.[17]
The author Jeffrey Masson dedicated a whole sub-section of his book Against Therapy to criticism of Milton Erickson.[18] Masson questions the accuracy of Erickson's case reports. Regarding Erickson's report of a female patient who was allegedly hypnotised to have spontaneous orgasms throughout the day, Masson writes, "The whole thing is tinged with fantasy and has a feeling of unreality about it." [19]

There is a brief history of the origins of hypnosis. Research the names further. Then research:
Social complance in hypnosis
Penn & teller bullshit hypnosis
Graham Wagstaff psychologist hypnosis
Hypnosis does not exist

Then observe some youtube videos and it becomes obvious stage hypnosis is 'role playing' - social compliance.

by observing videos of a stage show its impossible to tell whether or not a volunteer is genuinely hypnotized, although I'm certain many, perhaps the majority are not. someone who can achieve somnambulism will appear to be a normal awake person but highly suggestible and acting under the influence of the unconscious mind. I presume you have not allowed anyone to attempt to hypnotize yourself, but there have been sceptics like yourself, who have been hypnotized and found it to be real.
hypnotism is like gravity-you don't have to believe it for it to work.

[SWM]

only about 10% can be hypnotized that deeply which is why most people do not believe it.

this is itself a misunderstanding of the hypnotic state. trance is a perfectly natural state. everybody including many animals enter this state naturally on their own internal cues or in response to external stimuli. the hypnotist positions themselves psychological, socially and emotionally as the stimuli to which the subject responds by going into trance.

any failure to hypnotize is not the failure of the subject but a failure of the hypnotist to provide the conditions for that particular subject.

standardized hypnotic procedures which are often used in research will result in some people not being conditioned in to the trance state and would result in some individuals not being hypnotized.

this problem is due to the hypnotic procedure being standardized for research purposes and being designed to be applicable to many subjects.

this problem would not occur if each hypnotic procedure was designed to the unique and idiosyncratic demands of the individual.

[gone]

squabbling.. not heard that for some time. Harrison did not answer any question, raise any new issues but just added to the end of the topic with quotes from books.. As the topic is about 'believing without questioning' it seemed ridiculous, ignorant and stupid to do that, as half the topic is about believing in the testomies of others. By posting what he did is confirming why people believe in hypnosis. (ignorance, inability to listen, question, experiment, observe etc - as hes' done his learning of the subject from books - why would he believe them true?) That's why I said it was stupid. I don't use that word but nothing else had effect.

YOU CAN'T LEARN SOME THINGS FROM BOOKS.
You can read music books, but you'll never learn to play an insturment by reading about playing an instrument. You can read about hypnosis but you'll never learn about it by reading about it..

???Why doesn't he give us his account of what it's like to be hypnotised, as he says he's been hypnotised???

Edit: I'm going to the dentist later to have a broken back tooth extracted. I have had extractions before without pain relief, because it doesn't hurt, you can hear the grinding as the tools get hold and you can feel a hand and tools in your mouth, but removal of a tooth does not hurt, hense no need for injection/hypnosis or whatever.. Because it's a MYTH that it is painful. I know because I've been there & done it, have you? or do you just 'beleive' having a tooth extracted is painful?

[Zepher08]

I have been hypnotized a lot. It is pretty regular thing. I mean people go into trance while driving autos and watching television . It is a natural state. No big deal.

Being in trance state and or hypnotized does not take away ones mind or ability to discern. One does not become all of a sudden open to any suggestion.

Here is an example of what I experience. Say I would like to change my mind about something as in change a habit  or internal thinking condition.  there is a lot of work to do in the unconscious. You can work on it yourself or hire some one to help you.

Working with in the unconscious is an interesting process.

Being hypnotized or being in trance state tends to be a relaxed state. decidedly it felt more conscious even though it is referred to the unconscious. It should be referred to as the unknown operating system as in the head operating system. The conscious state, out of trance is very narrow and utilitarian.

Being hypnotized is simply making direct contact to the unconscious with out the so called conscious state cover up for exterior functional purposes.

Consciouse state is most like being clothed ... where as unconscious is the naked truth. It is the operating system or hard drive.

So being hypnotized is getting into the hard drive. It is a really cool experience.

Deciding to get hypnotized for psychological purposes is a far cry from just turning on the tube and allowing the head to be manipulated with out knowing the intention or purpose.

Knowing how ones operating system works as far as i am concerned will be the future of human intelligence.

But for now, it seems that people are still considering the 12%-14% of conscious mind a self and the part that determines behaviors and choices. HA! total joke

 

 
 

[gone]

What is a total joke is that people consider watching TV and driving as being in a hypnotic trance.. :-)
That would be like eating and let's see... sitting down, standing up and walking... we could also catogarise as being in a 'hypnotic trance' because we don't think about doing that either, we just do it. It's a cop out that people say that is being 'hypnotised' it's a joke..
There are words like focusing attention, concentration, instinctively.. this is not being 'hypnotised'..

[gone]

I've copied this from wikipedia which I guess summaries the 'squabbles' and in a sentence identifies two trains of thought on the subject.

"Hypnosis is a mental state (according to state theory) or imagined role enactment according to "non-state theory")

There are those who believe in state theory and those who believe in non state theory (those latter having comon sense :-))

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

[Zepher08]

I think you have the wrong idea. People go into trance state every day even if just for a few moments. The example of trance state  during driving and watching television is simple. It doesn't mean some one is in a trance state for hours at a time watching TV.

Any way, it is a natural state of mind. I can not figure what you are looking for on this thread. To disprove that trance state and some one  or something bring on trance state in another is untrue and impossible? I am not clear here.

[harrison]

 http://www.whale.to/b/bowart_b.html
here is a useful link which leads to more links about hypnotism

[gone]

You write 'Being hypnotised or being in a trance state'..  Why do you associate the two?
Watching TV is focused attention, as would be basket weaving,  why is one considered to be a 'hypnotic trance' but not the other?
It's impossible for a person to be put into a trance by another, ie: handshake induction. Hypno disk, or swinging watch.. or talking voice.. I think you misunderstand what hypnosis and trance are.. Hypnosis is the idea that people can be hypnotised.. it' is not possible to hypnotise a person. That is what this thread is about.

[SWM]

Watching TV is focused attention, as would be basket weaving,  why is one considered to be a 'hypnotic trance' but not the other?

i have discussed in this thread that focused attention is a element in the facilitation of hypnosis. if one is basket weaving and goes into a trance then there is no operator and no subject. it is just a naturally occuring state as is driving or reading an absorning novel. these are experiences were a natural trance state could occcur. if an operator ie hypnotist, media producer, has the intention to induce trance then that could (notice i say could) be termed hypnosis.  but defining hypnosis in this situations is pointless and arbitraty.

to discuss hypnosis it is more accurately defined when the operator and subject are in agreement, everything else is debatable and dependent on factors such as intention of the designer of the procedure or the complicity of the subject etc. we even have natrual trance occurances to non hypnotically designed phenomena as discussed above (reading, driving, basket weaving) which cannot be simply pigeon holed as hypnotic but which have many of the features and elements of hypnosis and are therefore useful in understanding the hypnotic state.

Hypnosis is the idea that people can be hypnotised..

hypnosis is not the idea it is the process.

hypnotising someone involves the induction of the trance state in that person.  if you think that is not possible then you are not fully aware of the responses of the people that you talk to each and every day. people are slipping in and out of trance states all the time and muchmore so when in conversation, being aware of these states and being able to facilitate them within another person is possible.

when two people agree for this to happen we might (notice i said might) call that hypnosis.


it' is not possible to hypnotise a person. That is what this thread is about.

[gone]

it seems in an attempt to validate hypnosis as real, people associate it with natural phenomena as above, which is soo wrong.
There is NO WAY a hypnotherapist can hypnotise a person. Just like a stage hypnotist can not hypnotise a person or a medic can hypnotise a person. IT IS NOT POSSIBLE

If an agreement is made, that agreement is 'social compliance' people play along because it would be too awkward not too comply. Possibly even convincing themselves they felt 'something'...
All a person has to do is research Mesmer and see how his patients would conform to what was expected of them, later Braid.. sleep, or 'nervous sleep' on demand, deep trance (however far more dramatic).. we know this isn't possible, but back then people believed and did what was expected.. ROLE PLAY, SOCIAL COMPLIANCE - pretending. Today it is EXACTLY THE SAME PRETENSE.

It is not possible to induce trance with a handshake, yet people PRETEND and fall into trance. This is what is happening in hypnotherapy, it's a game and mostly people comply to their given roles.

[SWM]

it is not wrong to associate hypnosis with natural pehenomena because hypnosis involves the facilitation and utilisation of natural phenomena.

if the agreement was the hypnotic procedure and all that was required was the agreement then social compliance might be a more accurate explanation of hypnosis but it is not. you do not understand this and you do not want to understand this because it does not fit into your view of the world.

your making conclusion about something you are not qualified in have never experienced and have never studied (studied in an academic capacity, although you might consisder youtube and wikipedia as a form of study, it is not) and while doing this you are calling people ignorant and foolish.

in pointing out the splinter in the eye of another you are not aware of the plank in your own.

[Zepher08]

WoW four pages for disproving the process of hypnosis. OK Thanks  SWM. I enjoyed what you have written.

[sakoz]

Agreed,, wow four pages......
Have any views been changed?
Have each maintained their staus quo, through out the "fiestco"?
Then what was the point? Who has the worst case of "hardening of the categories"?

[harrison]

this link gives quite a good and accurate description of hypnotism

 http://www.hypnos.co.uk/hypnomag/peltbook/contents.htm

[gone]

I have studdied this 10years+ alongside professors in psychology, just last month discussed with at QED. http://www.qedcon.org/
I have also previously spent over 6 years in the magic community both observing and experimenting. I conclude hypnosis does not exist after 10+ years study in various diciplins.
Psychology
Hypnosis
Magic/mentalism
Experimenting
Etc...
Through research, observation & experimentation I came to that conclusion.. How many of you can say that? How many of you conclude hypnosis exist from reading books?


I use both scholary articles and youtube and wikipedia as references here so people can cross reference & come to their own common sense conclusion. But they don't because their psycholcoy is 'closed to experience' and they are not accepting of new ideas that contradict their own beliefs' ...
I was conditioned to belive in hypnosis just like everyone else, the difference is I am extreme high 'openness to experience' and highly observant. But why should I quesiton it? Because I observed there was something not quite right about it. On stage, in hypnotherapy, when asking people what it was, their reactions etc.. For gods sake it was even used as testimony in a criminal court of law.. which is recognised as quite shocking now. MY references are from various diciplins. Not from one biased source.
I doubt people understand psychology, let alone magic and most are not independent thinkers, for if they were they'd surely understand... it is not possible to hypnotise a person.

Can you hypnotise a person? or do you just believe you can?
Have you ever been hypnotised? Tell me why you people believe hypnosis exist, without giving reference to books. There are books on how to communicate with your dead pet, but it doesn't mean they're true.

So the people who've experience hypnosis (I'm not interested in anyone else).. Is is like 'nervous sleep'.. like what James Braid wrote about? Is that what it's like.. Because anything else is not hypnosis. Lying on a couch relaxed is not being hypnotised, if behavours are changed it is CBT (practice of changing negative thoughts into positive one) and Not hypnosis..

I don't understand how a quack with magnets has become what it is today. And what it is? People tend to believe it's what they think it is?? And cherry pic the bits they want to believe in.. Hmmm

Yes lots of pages, but hardly one account of an experience of hypnosis, all people write about is why they believe it exists. Which is interesting research in ignorance.

Here's the difference, yesterday I had a tooth extracted & a filling WITHOUT ANAESTHETIC - I KNOW from experimenting & experience it's not necessary. People quote to say hypnosis must exist because people have surgery & dental treatment etc, under hypnosis (but they themselves haven't experienced this - so how do they know?)..I have also had a bi-opsy without anaesthetic.. soldiers had their gangreenous legs amputate WITHOUT ANAESTHETIC it is not necessary for surgery.. The pain can be managed. I know because I've been there and done it, HAVE YOU? (that's a general question for people to ask themselves, not directed at anyone person)..
No matter how much evidence I provide people are not listening, they just ignore it and say what they want to say however irrelevent...

For every instance; from handshake induction to hypnotherapy, I can give a reason for what is really happening and I have done.. No one can prove it exist but I can and have proved it doesn't.  

[gone]

Harrison.. I'm sorry but must laugh at your link on reading this sentence

"There are those who believe quite sincerely and without irreverence that when the Lord caused Adam ‘to fall into a deep sleep’, this trance-like state was brought about by hypnotism in response to the Divine Will"

Ok I think that says where you are coming from...

If you don't know who Franz Anton Mesmer is and his Animal Magnatism therapy you are completely ignorant to the history of hypnosis. But if you want to belive it began with the Lord causing Adam to sleep, then fine, remain in your ignornat & deluded bliss of nonsense..
AND again you are just quoting stuff. Why can you not listen or at least contribute something of value?

If people beleive in the bible, are they not likely to belive in anything.

[SWM]

Franz mesmer was using animal magnetism not hypnotist. there are some similarities but many differences. particularly in the intention of the operator.

20 + years of study would make you what a doctor, MD or a Phd? or did you just observe things and call it studying.

your argument is based on a lot of misinformation.

here are the facts that you need to dispute if you want to show hypnosis does not exist.

Fact 1: Trance is a naturally occurring state easily accessible by any human and most mammals.
Fact 2: it is possible to induce trance in another person by providing the optimum conditions for trance to occur.
Fact 3: In trance a person will respond to suggestions (including Auto-suggestion)

if those 3 facts are possible then hypnosis is possible.

[gone]

SWM you say Fact 1-3 then ask 'if' those facts are possible..
'if' does not equat to 'fact'.

trance is not hypnosis anyway.. James Braid first coined the term 'Hypnosis' as 'nervous sleep' having extended upon Mesmers theories & practices.

is trance 'nervous sleep' I'm still awaiting some experiences here..