talkmagic.co.uk

What are your views on hypnosis? Like when people are put into trances ect. by magicians. Is that actually possible?
I dont think that answering that would infringe on exposing a trick.
Thanks.

prepare yourself for several very different views on the subject. and i can picture a couple of people who may write half an essay here, or just link you to various other hypnosis threads.

i'll kick us off: it's all a load of c*** (not the best)!

nah, seriously, i've done my reading and i know a bit, (not that I'm ever going to go out and try and do any of it in any serious way) so i respect some hypnotists. i was watching one a while back after having a lengthy discussion with a friend on the topic and half way through the act he was saying things like "it's just all rubbish, it's all so fake" and I'm sat there thinking "yeah, but if you know what's going on, it's some pretty entertaining and occasionally quite impressive rubbish....(now stop watching it and thinking it's hypnotism, in the same way you don't view pro wrestling as a sport)".

let the contrary arguements begin!

It probably would have been best to use the search engine... you've opened up a bit can of worms with that one.

But, as new research is proving, yes, there is such a thing as the hypnotic state, the thing is it's not some mystical thing. I'm not sure how much you know about psychology so I won't go into the precise details - but if you're interested in the precise details of what it is then you should look into the work of Joe Griffin and Ivan Tyrrell. Some information can be found in the Archive section of www.hgi.org.uk as well as a few monographs and books of theirs.

[] It MUST be handled carefully, and proper training is essential.

I always have mixed views on hypnotism. Some of its rubbish but others are really quite believable. My view is that if you believe you can be hypnotised, then you personally can be hypnotised. But if you believe you cannot be hypnotised, then you personally cannot.

I've heard a lot of people say this on different corners of the internet. I would love to speak to someone just after a hypnotist "hypnotised" them and see what they were thinking at the time. If they just woke up or heard the hypnotists voice and was compelled to act like a chicken.

I guess to me it's a mystery. Some people can, but others cannot. Don't know if we will ever know the real answer

LeftEye wrote:I always have mixed views on hypnotism. Some of its rubbish but others are really quite believable. My view is that if you believe you can be hypnotised, then you personally can be hypnotised. But if you believe you cannot be hypnotised, then you personally cannot.

I've heard a lot of people say this on different corners of the internet. I would love to speak to someone just after a hypnotist "hypnotised" them and see what they were thinking at the time. If they just woke up or heard the hypnotists voice and was compelled to act like a chicken.

I guess to me it's a mystery. Some people can, but others cannot. Don't know if we will ever know the real answer

Actually, the answer is already known! I've fished out a page from the HGI website which contains a VERY brief outline:

http://www.hgi.org.uk/archive/sleepanddream1.htm

Hypnosis can most usefully be seen as a direct route to activating the REM state — all hypnotic phenomenon are explained with this insight — and, since hypnosis and suggestion play such an important role in psychotherapy, this fact is of great significance to psychotherapists and counsellors.

Once this is understood (and their monograph "Hypnosis and Trance States: A New Psychobiological Explanation" is a must for an overview of modern research into hypnosis) the reason why various inductions work makes perfect sense.

Cardza wrote:But, as new research is proving, yes, there is such a thing as the hypnotic state

I'm pretty sure people have been getting hypnotised for at least 7 or 8 years now

depends on your definition of the state really, there's an ever so slight difference between a trance used by hypnotherapists (chuckle chuckle) and the "trance" used by stage hypno-folk.

Two Very different opinions there. Search engines seem to just bring up useless info about their 'great' products that will have you doing it in minutes! ......Sure.
I'll check out that link though.
Cheers

Lawrence wrote:

Cardza wrote:But, as new research is proving, yes, there is such a thing as the hypnotic state

I'm pretty sure people have been getting hypnotised for at least 7 or 8 years now

depends on your definition of the state really, there's an ever so slight difference between a trance used by hypnotherapists (chuckle chuckle) and the "trance" used by stage hypno-folk.

Indeed, but what I meant was this evidence really does prove quite conclusively that there IS such a thing as the trance state, and fits in perfectly with the "bigger picture" of what it is to be human.

With regards to the therapy/stage trance comment, well... it depends! The intent is most certainly different, but if the stage hypnotist really is inducing a genuine trance state as opposed to a pseudo one then they are the same.

I guess it's quite clear that this is something I feel quite passionately about, so all I'll say for now is it will all make sense once you read the aforementioned works (it really is fascinating reading if you're into the sort of thing).

I didn't say that it shouldn't be handled carefully. I merely said that it didn't exist. Two different things you know.

mark lewis wrote:I didn't say that it shouldn't be handled carefully. I merely said that it didn't exist. Two different things you know.

In which case, I retract the statement in question.

Strawbs wrote:What are your views on hypnosis? Like when people are put into trances ect. by magicians. Is that actually possible?

No, clearly none of it is possible. ...you're not from around here, are you.

You've already attracted the attention of the local, apparently ironic, electronic village idiot.

Hypnosis is a subjective state--it is what the subject believes it is.

Whether it is "real" or not is a matter of semantics... What is "real?" In my definition, "real" is anything that actually takes place. As such, hypnosis is indeed "real," otherwise stage hypnotists and hypnotherapists around the world would be out of jobs. The techniques clearly work. The tricky question is "why do they work?"

It's a tough question to answer, no? In "reality" (and I hesitate to use that word, because as I say again, what is "real?), it works because the subject (spectator/client/hypnotee--it's another case of semantics) really truly believes it is working. Consciously or otherwise, they play along.

Perhaps you've seen Derren Brown work his "hypnotic" wizardry on TV. One of his older signature effects is to get a spectator to believe so strongly that her hand is stuck to the table that she can't move it--and it works because he tells her to.

That's all hypnotic suggestions are--the hypnotist tells the hypnotee that they're hypnotized, and they go into a hypnotic trance. Read that sentence ten times fast...

Perhaps you can remember a time when you were driving on a long car ride and thirty minutes passed in the time it seemed to take one song to play on the radio. Maybe you can remember a time when you were having the time of your life and an hour had passed by your watch, but it only seemed like five minutes. On the other hand, maybe you've been in lecture or waiting in line at the grocery store and it seems like half an hour has passed, but it's only been a few minutes.

This is a common occurence, but one could argue that you're in an altered state of consciousness when such things happen. Many people wouldn't consider it hypnosis (semantics again)--I'm not even sure I'd call it hypnosis--but "altered state of consciousness" works fine. Once you're in this altered state, you can be easily manipulated.

Malls, fairs, churches--any place where there's a gathering of people with plenty of noise and distractions about--all take advantage of altered states. Malls are designed to influence you to buy, buy, buy. Look around. Lots of people buying things, pictures of people buying things, advertisements of things to buy... with all the distractions, people tend to latch on to the thing that takes the least amount of thought--buying! Fairs have flashy lights, music, rides spinning and swinging to and fro... You're distracted and easily manipulated into spending $50 to win that cheap stuffed animal at the rigged carni games.

Evangelical churches are great examples of altered states. I don't want to tread on touchy ground, but the pastors of such churches are wonderful manipulators. Keep in mind that the word "manipulation" often carries a negative connotation, but it's inherently neutral. As Derren Brown himself would say, "Tit is a bad word, and to trombone someone could also be an unsavory expression. Manipulation, however, is neutral." If you've seen television footage of such manipulation, you'll see people in the congregation flinging themselves wildly to and fro, caught up in the energy of the crowd. They have permission to do so--it is acceptable for them in that scenario and they allow themselves to do it.

Which brings us back to my original point: it works solely because the subject believes it's working. They give themselves permission to go along with the hypnotist (the hypnotist doesn't have to be an individual--it could just as well be themselves or a large crowd). They're acting a part while convincing themselves that they're not under their own control.

Hypnotic subjects, especially in stage shows, will often describe themselves as realizing exactly what they were doing when they were on stage and that they'd normally not do it, but for some reason, they just didn't care. They'd given themselves permission to act wildly because the hypnotist told them to.

To harness this power of manipulation (remember: neutral term) in a magical act, you can use hypnotic techniques in performance. Hypnotic techniques don't have to be swinging a gold watch before a subjects eyes, mind you. They can include audience conditioning (think Pavlov with a deck of cards), misdirection (you're getting the audience to buy into your belief--your frame), and the like.

While this may be a little more than you bargained for, I hope it helps. I've used pseudo-hypnotic techniques (things that look like hypnosis but really aren't what many lay people would consider hypnosis) in my mentalism work and it's both fun to do and entertaining... Perhaps I'm just an egotistical, power-hungry nut job, though. I'm not sure.

Ciao,
Rob

If you've seen television footage of such manipulation, you'll see people in the congregation flinging themselves wildly to and fro, caught up in the energy of the crowd. They have permission to do so--it is acceptable for them in that scenario and they allow themselves to do it.

Good point

I think Rob's definition is pretty good. The people aren't "hypnotised". They have merely deluded themselves into thinking they are. If you wish to say that this delusion is "hypnosis" in itself good luck to you. The difference is merely semantics.

I prefer however my own definition. Hypnotism is a load of horse manure and it always has been.

A government committee investigating the matter was formed in the 18th century comprising the best minds of the day including Benjamin Franklin. The verdict was "an excitement of the imagination".

I think that verdict stands today.

mark lewis wrote:A government committee investigating the matter was formed in the 18th century comprising the best minds of the day including Benjamin Franklin. The verdict was "an excitement of the imagination".

I think that verdict stands today.

I'm tired of hearing myself repeat the findings which perfectly explain the hypnotic state - with VERY strong psychobiological support which connects many of the dots in modern psychology - the implications of which are creating a revolution in the world of psychiatry - so I won't repeat myself.

But of course the best minds more than two hundred years ago didn't find this out, so it must all be rubbish!