talkmagic.co.uk

HI -

Me again. I first learn NLP by taking the appendix out of one Richard Bandlers books I don't remember which but it is the same one that afore mentioned book largely goes over.

All I did was take the listed rules and write out hundreds of examples of them for use in my everyday life. Got to be second nature after a while. You can get richards book at the used book store for about 4 dollars a piece. There are four of them. Good to have around anyways.

-misj

I would also recommend "The New Encyclopedia of Stage Hypnotism" after seeing a review of it elswhere on this forum i went out and bought a copy. Within the hours I was able to convince my wife that her foot was stuck to the floor (in hindsight I should have done it in the kitchen by the sink instead of in the middle of the lounge ).

Strep wrote:I would also recommend "The New Encyclopedia of Stage Hypnotism" after seeing a review of it elswhere on this forum i went out and bought a copy. Within the hours I was able to convince my wife that her foot was stuck to the floor (in hindsight I should have done it in the kitchen by the sink instead of in the middle of the lounge ).

So does anyone know of any reputable courses in London or near it, that teach you hypnotism.?

I have a video course for sale but lest various daft members here start to jump up and down saying that I am advertising I should point out that I am refusing to sell it since I am leaving for Latin America for showbusiness purposes in a few days and would not be able to fulfill the orders anyway.

As is well known I think "hypnosis" either on stage or for therapy is a load of baloney and this view has excited controversy here among the less experienced. I do not wish to get into it again. I merely wish to say I was highly amused and delighted to find out a few days ago that legendary stage hypnotist Reveen shares my view. I am sure that Reveeen must have been performing hypnotism for around 50 years or so. Reveen for those of you who do not know is Lance Burton's manager.

Good to see you being a little bit more subjective nowadays Mark.

All I say to any nonstate theorists: look out the monograph I mentioned and, for a more through overview, the book Human Givens and you'll see just what exactly the hypnotic state is and just how vital the underlying faculties are to life... indeed, without them we wouldn't be here arguing about all of this.

Savour the irony...

Reveen believes that hypnotism is a load of cobblers.
P..... G..........believes it is a load of cobblers. I cannot mention his name because he is still a noted hypnotherapist but he was the number one stage hypnotist of his day.
Gil Boyne believes it is a load of cobblers. Martin Breese told me that Boyne admitted it to him personally.
I cannot say for 100 percent certainty but I have heard things that lead me to believe that the revered and legendary Ormond Mc'Gill knew it was baloney too.

These people are among the four leading stage hypnotists of the twentieth century. If they believed that hypnosis is bunk then it is good enough for me to believe it too.

Well, they must be right then...

They are. I am glad it is beginning to dawn on you.

I've long since grown tired of the debate to be honest, and I'm not willing to argue with people who refuse to look into new research and findings. Such people have no right to claim their belief as the truth.

Provided people recognise and appreciate the dangers of carelessly messing about with hypnosis and seek proper training before attempting it, that's good enough for me.

I have often wondered how something that does not exist can be dangerous. With regard to the "new research" I did read some of it and couldn't understand a word of it but I noticed that it didn't even mention hypnosis.

If you honestly think people on stage who dance with broomsticks, hide under their chairs because they think it is raining or really believe they have lost their bellybuttons are not aware of what they are doing then there is no hope for you.

Out of an average of 10 people on stage 3 will manage to con themselves they have been hypnotised, 3 will be good actors and the other 4 will either be bloody useless or just sit their with their eyes closed because they don't know what else to do.

In therapy situations the scene is even worse. The "trance" is so light that virtually every therapist has 50% of their patients say "I don't think I was under" and the therapist then has to give them some gobblydegook to convince them that they were. The REAL reason people say that they are not "under" is guess what?

They aren't!!!!!!

THE HYPNOTIC STATE DOES NOT EXIST!

mark lewis wrote:THE HYPNOTIC STATE DOES NOT EXIST!

That's convinced me, then

No, Mark, I explained that - I told you to look up "Hypnosis and Trance States: A New Psychobiological Explanation by Joe Griffin and Ivan Tyrrell" - it costs five pounds, but you still refused - even when I offered to send you a copy for free!

So let me quote a section - wish permission - here:

Joe Griffin and Ivan Tyrrell wrote:But, once you understand that hypnosis is an accessing of that programme of the REM state which is absolutely vital for life itself - for programming our instinctive knowledge and the acting out of it through post hypnotic suggestion - then you realise that hypnosis is tapping into the most basic programme of all.

THAT is what the hypnotic state is - the REM state, a reality generator.

It's how our genes programme our brains when we are in the womb. When you hypnotise someone this is what you are tapping into. THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL. You are giving their brains a script to work off. When you genuinely hypnotise somebody and tell them that they will open the window when they hear a bell chime (for instance), and they do, they are not just 'playing along' - they have been programmed to act like that.

If you really care, look into the book Human Givens. It will explain all and how it fits in with a new approach to psychotherapy.

There is no hope for you Lewis if you speak with such arrogance whilst refusing to look into modern research. By all means show me some evidence which disproves this new approach. I will happily look into it. But DON'T sit there and spout rubbish about how it's not dangerous when you don't know all the facts.

I DO know all the facts. I do it for a living. You don't.
The new psychobabble book is just that. Psychobabble.

Benjamin Franklin got it right rather a long time ago. His investigating committee said it was "an excitement of the imagination" A pretty good description I would have thought.

I don't have the time to study your psychobabble book and it is full of funny obscure language that I haven't the time or energy to absorb. Why don't you sum up the theory for us as best you can in plain language?

Hmm, who would you trust? The words of Paul McKenna and his ilk who have made millions from hypnosis or a penniliess man spending his twilight years in rented accomoation whiling his hours away by being an ass on internet forums?

You decide!