Derren Brown's screaming stooges

[silver birch]

In my humble opinion, anybody who believes that a man with a beard sits in the clouds and watches us all the time is stupid indeed.

But are we just swapping "stupid indeed" opinions or are we going to get to the evidence that proves you are right to think other people are stupid?

Because so far, you haven't made a very compelling case... beyond "magician fools people on his telly show"... Which isn't really news to anyone.

with the casino stunt I've made a very compelling case with factors other than hypnotism involved, earlier on this thread.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

From a book entitled Medical and dental hypnosis by John Hartland B. Sc., M.B., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P.
page 360-
Hypnosis in dental surgery.
Whilst the use of hypnosis in dental surgery has been known and appreciated for many years, it has only recently assumed its rightful place. Many workers in this field, such as Radin, Becker, Frost and Wookey in this country,have written and lectured upon the subject, in the United States, Moss, Secter, Heron, and Weinstein are well known for the invaluable contributions they have made in furthering our knowledge in this respect.
Obviously with those patients who can achieve the deep trance state on the first or second attempt, dentistry will present no problems. Most of these will succeed in producing complete analgesia, and many will develop total amnesia for such operations as are performed. In these circumstances there is no quicker or easier way of carrying out any dental operation. the patient can be seated in the chair and put into the trance state instantaneously by a conditioned signal, or within 10 seconds by a normal induction procedure. Anaesthesia of the intended area of operation can be obtained in a further 10 seconds, and the dentist can be proceeding about his business within 30 seconds of the patient entering the surgery. Unfortunately, this is only possible in a very small percentage of the population and is consequently quite unatainable as a routine measure.

I'll ask again: "Do you have a link to any medical papers on that (and I mean real scientific papers, which have been published in reputable, peer-reviewed journals)?"

 

[silver birch]

So that's a "no" then?

John Hartland, the author of Medical and Dental Hypnosis, died in 1977, but this is his CV
visiting psychiatrist, Hallam hospital, West Bromwich, 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, honourary fellow of the American Society of clinical hypnosis, fellow of the International society for clinical and experimental hypnosis, editor of the British Journal of clinical hypnosis.

 

[silver birch]

I'll ask again: "Do you have a link to any medical papers on that (and I mean real scientific papers, which have been published in reputable, peer-reviewed journals)?"

no.
are you calling dentists who use hypnosis today quacks?

 

[Stray Cat]

I have never said that, precisely because, although DB does magic, with his magicians hat on, so to speak, when he hypnotizes people he claims it is real hypnotism, which is not a magic trick. and its virtually impossible for someone who is not an expert to know if someone is either in a 'wide awake' deep trance, or faking.

There is no such thing as an "expert" in hypnotism... it's bunk.

DB uses the appearance of hypnotising people as part of the illusion.

 

[Stray Cat]

John Hartland, the author of Medical and Dental Hypnosis, died in 1977, but this is his CV
visiting psychiatrist, Hallam hospital, West Bromwich, 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, honourary fellow of the American Society of clinical hypnosis, fellow of the International society for clinical and experimental hypnosis, editor of the British Journal of clinical hypnosis.

On the side of a jar of Nescafe coffee it say "the best coffee in the world"... of course they would say that wouldn't they?

Do you have any articles written by people without an invested interest?

 

[Azrael 5]

with the casino stunt I've made a very compelling case with factors other than hypnotism involved, earlier on this thread.

No you made a bunch of assumptions,just like you did about Seance(which you conviently forgot about now it seems)and Hero at 30,000 feet.
Stop thinking that is a factual documentary or a science show about hypnosis.Its a magic show,all is not as portryaed in most cases.
That is not to say they are stooges,I have given my reasons take it or leave it.

 

[Sledge]

In the interests of getting to some sort of point in this thread, perhaps we can focus on the repeated accusation of Derren Brown using stooges?

So far, the evidence put forward by silver birch for Brown using stooges is that he (silver birch) cannot think of any other way for the events depicted on television to have taken place. This has, I think it's fair to say, not been sufficient evidence for most people in this thread. Therefore, I'd like to compile a list of what evidence would be considered sufficient. I'll get the ball rolling with testimony from one or more of the stooges. Anyone else think of anything?

 

[Azrael 5]

In the interests of getting to some sort of point in this thread, perhaps we can focus on the repeated accusation of Derren Brown using stooges?

So far, the evidence put forward by silver birch for Brown using stooges is that he (silver birch) cannot think of any other way for the events depicted on television to have taken place. This has, I think it's fair to say, not been sufficient evidence for most people in this thread. Therefore, I'd like to compile a list of what evidence would be considered sufficient. I'll get the ball rolling with testimony from one or more of the stooges. Anyone else think of anything?

Sledge I cant think of anything else,that one thing you suggest is probably be all and end all;I too think we should stick to topic,deviating into hypnosis articles isnt helping.

 

[AdMan]

In the interests of getting to some sort of point in this thread, perhaps we can focus on the repeated accusation of Derren Brown using stooges?

So far, the evidence put forward by silver birch for Brown using stooges is that he (silver birch) cannot think of any other way for the events depicted on television to have taken place. This has, I think it's fair to say, not been sufficient evidence for most people in this thread. Therefore, I'd like to compile a list of what evidence would be considered sufficient. I'll get the ball rolling with testimony from one or more of the stooges. Anyone else think of anything?

The one piece of circumstantial evidence I've seen discussed ad nauseam in the other thread is the fact that one of the spectators who was "hypnotized" in one of Derren's shows turned out to be an actress who afterwards listed that appearance on her IMDB profile for a while.

I think that is far from conclusive regarding Derren's use of stooges, as the word is usually defined.

I recently watched one of the talks from a past Essential Magic Conference (an "online convention" for magicians) discussing a TV pilot shot a few years back for UK TV. This was a mentalism show which utilized some fake hypnotism, and the speaker said that no stooges had been used. He did say, however, that the audience had been carefully selected, and that they had invited members of the local acting group, because it was thought they would be able to provide the desired responses.

We know Derren carefully selects his audience members, and it's not a stretch to think that he would also invite actors, who might be more able to deliver the desired "peformance". If an aspiring actor is lucky enough to get selected and make it into a famous performer's show, it wouldn't be unrealistic to expect him or her to list this in their CV, even if they hadn't actually been hired to perform. The fact that she later dropped the reference may mean she wasn't actually hired at all.

Whether you consider such a person to be a "stooge" or just someone who is good at pretending (and chosen for that reason) depends on your definition.

I just think it's a part of a professional magic and mentalism performance. Nothing to get too excited about.

 

[Sledge]

Good points and well made. Perhaps I've jumped the gun slightly and should have started with "What is a stooge?"

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

no.

You're free to believe whatever you want, then, but I'll wait until there's actual medical evidence in support of it before believing it to be true. Especially as all the actual published peer-reviewed data on pain relief through hypnosis only says it's effective when used in conjunction with pain killers.

Sorry, but I'm more prepared to believe in good scientific research than I am unverified anecdotes.

 

[lane99]

I assume you are including the ones who have teeth extracted under hypnosis, with no other anaesthetic.

...are you calling dentists who use hypnosis today quacks?

Yes, by definition, any dentist claiming they can use hypnotism to seamlessly replace conventional anesthesia without any detrimental effects to their patients would be a quack.

But don't muddy the waters. The topic here is Derren Brown and how he accomplishes his performances. A discussion on the validity of hypnosis in clinical/medical settings involves different issues and calls for it's own thread.

 

[silver birch]

I'm glad you are a critical thinker. perhaps you could think critically about this. for a hypnotism skeptic, such as yourself, NOTHING will ever change your view of hypnotism, so any hypnotism thread is a waste of time. EXCEPT, being hypnotized yourself, however, not everyone can be, so, you may never know, goodbye.

 

[Lamuella]

And, no, in this case, saying you are not using stooges, and then actually using them, is emphatically not the opposite of misdirection. It IS misdirection.

Why? Because except for the occasional Derren Brownoser or fan-boy (the type who are still jumping up and down pretending that he hasn't already been busted using uncredited actors) if he doesn't mention they are not using stooges, many viewers are quite likely to simply assume that is exactly what they ARE doing.

The polar opposite of misdirection would be a magician saying "I am not stuffing this hankerchief into a little thumb shaped tube I am secretly holding in my fist". That would be running, when you are not being chased.

Conversely, claiming your are not using stooges, when you actually are, is running when you ARE being chased. Which is the polar opposite of the polar opposite of misdirection.

So let me get this straight:

Saying "we are not using this technique" and then using it is the opposite of misdirection.

But saying "We are not using this technique" and then using it is misdirection.

Is that what you are saying?

 

[Lamuella]

I'll ask again: "Do you have a link to any medical papers on that (and I mean real scientific papers, which have been published in reputable, peer-reviewed journals)?"

to be fair, there are a lot of peer reviewed journal articles on the use of hypnosis in dentistry. To pick one example:

When pharmacologic anesthesia is precluded: the value of hypnosis as a sole anesthetic agent in dentistry
Author(s): Kleinhauz M., Eli I.
Citation: Special care in dentistry : official publication of the American Association of Hospital Dentists, the Academy of Dentistry for the Handicapped, and the American Society for Geriatric Dentistry, January 1993, vol./is. 13/1(15-18), 0275-1879 (1993 Jan-Feb)
Publication Date: January 1993

 

[Azrael 5]

I'm glad you are a critical thinker. perhaps you could think critically about this. for a hypnotism skeptic, such as yourself, NOTHING will ever change your view of hypnotism, so any hypnotism thread is a waste of time. EXCEPT, being hypnotized yourself, however, not everyone can be, so, you may never know, goodbye.

No proof of stooges forthcoming?No proof Derren Brown is selling "snake oil" forthcoming?
"Goodbye" indeed.

 

[3point14]

OK, accept my apology for that comment.

Technically speaking, that wasn't even an apology. You've just askled someone to accept an apology you have never given. Interesting.

 

[3point14]

The one piece of circumstantial evidence I've seen discussed ad nauseam in the other thread is the fact that one of the spectators who was "hypnotized" in one of Derren's shows turned out to be an actress who afterwards listed that appearance on her IMDB profile for a while.

I think that is far from conclusive regarding Derren's use of stooges, as the word is usually defined.

I recently watched one of the talks from a past Essential Magic Conference (an "online convention" for magicians) discussing a TV pilot shot a few years back for UK TV. This was a mentalism show which utilized some fake hypnotism, and the speaker said that no stooges had been used. He did say, however, that the audience had been carefully selected, and that they had invited members of the local acting group, because it was thought they would be able to provide the desired responses.

We know Derren carefully selects his audience members, and it's not a stretch to think that he would also invite actors, who might be more able to deliver the desired "peformance". If an aspiring actor is lucky enough to get selected and make it into a famous performer's show, it wouldn't be unrealistic to expect him or her to list this in their CV, even if they hadn't actually been hired to perform. The fact that she later dropped the reference may mean she wasn't actually hired at all.

Whether you consider such a person to be a "stooge" or just someone who is good at pretending (and chosen for that reason) depends on your definition.

I just think it's a part of a professional magic and mentalism performance. Nothing to get too excited about.

Spot on.

You'd need to prove that the actress concerned was specifically primed in some way beforehand in some way other than the general audience. I've seen no evidence at all for that.

In fact, all I've seen so far is someone who claims to be an expert in hypnosis (which is interesting because there really isn't enough academic consenus about the effect for anyone to be that much of an 'expert'. Any 'experts' I've met on the subject are self proclaimed.) jumping up and down saying, effectively, "He must be cheating, because I can't do that".

 

[steenkh]

In fact, all I've seen so far is someone who claims to be an expert in hypnosis (which is interesting because there really isn't enough academic consenus about the effect for anyone to be that much of an 'expert'. Any 'experts' I've met on the subject are self proclaimed.) jumping up and down saying, effectively, "He must be cheating, because I can't do that".

I think you are referring to me, although I did not say I was an expert on hypnosis. I only said that I had practised hypnosis a long time ago. But I guess that I am an expert compared to all those who seem to know nothing about it ...

I did not effectively say that DB must be cheating because I can't do that, but because I have never heard about people who can bring untrained patients into deep trance with that speed. If DB had hypnosis sessions with the would-be hero it is very likely that he could do that, but this was not shown in the show, so if the subject was prepared like that, he would effectively fall under the concept of "stooge".

It is interesting how Occam's razor is not permitted to be used in a TV show like this where so much is evidence that DB has transgressed his own ethical standards, whereas in other situations skeptics gladly wield Occam's Razor to arrive at the simplest conclusion.