Hypnosis: had any experience of it?

[Halfcentaur]

I think it's all pretend. Some people want it to be true to the point they will relinquish control completely.

 

[Halfcentaur]

Anyone who witnessed my friend's reaction kicking and screaming, would know it was not faked. No matter how or why it occurred, she was truly terrified. The three of us watching were taken by surprise at the reaction. No one expected it.

I don't think it is any different than people in church who collapse in absolute emotional ecstasy or fall to their knees sobbing uncontrollably. It's all connected with permitting yourself to enter such a state.

*which happens to people who profess non belief and denial of being religious all the time. And it happens with cases of possession as well.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

....
Not until I became a member of JREF did I ever doubt that hypnosis was a real phenomenon. I have a completely open mind on this subject, and I am more than willing to believe that hypnosis is some trivial sort of suggestion or role playing scenario, if the evidence for this notion there, but it sure did not seem that way to me during my time as a hypnotist.

This is much like my brother's experience. He really mastered the technique quite easily. I know why I'm not a good subject. I can't even stand the exercise where one relaxes an inch at a time: "Relax your toes, relax your feet, relax your ankles" ... etc. It was a fad for the professors in my nursing program and I groaned every time another one of them decided to show this wonderful thing to the class.

My brother used the 'floating on a cloud' story to hypnotize people. What did you use? Just curious.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't think it is any different than people in church who collapse in absolute emotional ecstasy or fall to their knees sobbing uncontrollably. It's all connected with permitting yourself to enter such a state.

*which happens to people who profess non belief and denial of being religious all the time. And it happens with cases of possession as well.

I've seen the Pentecostal performances up close and Popoff on the TV pushing people over. It may be a related phenomena but it is not the same. I don't believe the trances people go into are the same at all.

 

[NeilC]

People have had surgery under hypnosis. That would appear to stretch the "they're just going along with it for kicks" hypothesis beyond credibility.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I think it's all pretend. Some people want it to be true to the point they will relinquish control completely.

What does this even mean? If you truly relinquish control to the point where when someone says you are on the ceiling looking down, you actually believe you are, how is that pretending?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Surely you'd expect the creative bit of the brain to be more active whether hypnosis is a real phenomenon or not? Part of the gig is getting people to act things out so, whether they're 'in control' or not, they'll certainly be being creative.

ETA: Reminds me of the bizarre conclusion of the EEG readings on the supposed baby psychic that showed that during a reading he used the 'picture' part of his brain and was therefore 'receiving images'. Er yeah, or imagining things, d'oh!

I don't "expect" anything except to see a change in brain activity in someone hypnotized. What change occurs is what occurs.

 

[Minarvia]

No, I can't be hypnotized even though I really wanted to be at one point.

It was a nice, relaxing experience, and it was quite 'playing make-believe' but I never went into another state of being.

Precisely the same for me, Tatyana. I believe SkepticGinger and the others, but I participated in a program at my college, and later for "therapy" for 10 sessions with a psychologist, and never once could I "go under" even tho I tried so hard to be co-operative. I really wanted to go under and reach that state, but I just couldn't.

Maybe some of us are just immune no matter what? Regardless, the idea fascinates me and I can't help but feel a bit cross that I am left behind when others have been successful.

 

[Halfcentaur]

What does this even mean? If you truly relinquish control to the point where when someone says you are on the ceiling looking down, you actually believe you are, how is that pretending?

That's the gist of it. It's pretending to the point that in some sense it's actually working. You could call that real hypnosis if you want. I think calling it hypnosis is just semantics. The process to achieve the act of BS'ing yourself into accepting just about anything is called hypnosis to my thinking.

That's not to say this process is without tangible result, but I do not think it's an altered state of consciousness. It's more like an exercise of focus. If you want to call that a trance, I guess that's fine. But to me words like trance are just fancy words for relaxing the mind completely or focusing intently.

There's nothing unexplained about it. But I think it's nothing more than totally relinquishing the skeptical mind.

No different than an intense religious experience during a prayer revival. One person uses something like a deity as an excuse to enter such a state, another uses the suggestions of a hypnotist.

Saying hypnosis is real is a can of worms for me. What are you proposing hypnosis is?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

This guy says the naysayer position is naive. I would merely call it out of date regarding the brain science involved.

The state of hypnosis: evidence and applications

Whilst there is no doubt that in the clinical context a patient must be a willing participant in hypnosis, recent work suggests that to say that the influence of hypnosis on pain, blood coagulation, inflammatory responses, removal of warts, etc. is simply the result of role-playing or other psychosocial dynamics, is naive.

This recent change in orientation of hypnosis theories is largely a consequence of more informed approaches to the complexities of brain systems, and greater rigour in the application of scientific methodology and experimental design. Individual differences in hypnosis susceptibility, glaringly obvious since the technique's discovery a century ago, have been of particular use here, as responder and nonresponder groups can be selected a priori. We can be thankful in this selection for the development of reliable and valid scales of hypnotic susceptibility such as those from Harvard and Stanford. The state and trait nature of hypnotic susceptibility means, however, that it is essential to establish the retest reliability of group assignment; in our studies we now do this on three occasions, including one that is concurrent with electrophysiological recording.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Precisely the same for me, Tatyana. I believe SkepticGinger and the others, but I participated in a program at my college, and later for "therapy" for 10 sessions with a psychologist, and never once could I "go under" even tho I tried so hard to be co-operative. I really wanted to go under and reach that state, but I just couldn't.

Maybe some of us are just immune no matter what? Regardless, the idea fascinates me and I can't help but feel a bit cross that I am left behind when others have been successful.

I'm pretty sure I was especially unable to trust letting my brother control my mind, even ever so briefly.

But the literature I just reviewed looking for evidence for the thread definitely notes people differ significantly in their susceptibility to hypnosis.

Perhaps there is a physical difference: Increased anterior corpus callosum size associated positively with hypnotizability and the ability to control pain.

This is the first MRI study to report differences in brain structure size between low and highly hypnotizable, healthy, right-handed young adults. Participants were stringently screened for hypnotic susceptibility with two standardized scales, and then exposed to hypnotic analgesia training to control cold pressor pain. Only the highly hypnotizable subjects (HHs) who eliminated pain perception were included in the present study. These HHs, who demonstrated more effective attentional and inhibitory capabilities, had a significantly (P < 0.003) larger (31.8%) rostrum, a corpus callosum area involved in the allocation of attention and transfer of information between prefrontal cortices, than low hypnotizable subjects (LHs). These results provide support to the neuropsychophysiological model that HHs have more effective frontal attentional systems implementing control, monitoring performance and inhibiting unwanted stimuli from conscious awareness, than LHs.

 

[quarky]

Belaboring my point, advertizing works. We buy crap that is counter to our self-interests.

Buy my crap. Buy my crap. You are getting sleepy. When I snap my fingers, you will buy my crap.

 

[Olowkow]

This is much like my brother's experience. He really mastered the technique quite easily. I know why I'm not a good subject. I can't even stand the exercise where one relaxes an inch at a time: "Relax your toes, relax your feet, relax your ankles" ... etc. It was a fad for the professors in my nursing program and I groaned every time another one of them decided to show this wonderful thing to the class.

My brother used the 'floating on a cloud' story to hypnotize people. What did you use? Just curious.

Well, I had quite a few, but the principal technique was "Your eyes are getting heavier and heavier...." "Walking down a staircase, counting 10, 9, 8, etc." "You feel very calm, relaxed, peaceful..."

I had a good voice for it, a radio voice. Unfortunately every time someone tried to hypnotize me, I did too much analysis of his technique and never could achieve any trance. Someone telling me to relax my toes and feet (WTF?) would have just made me giggle.

 

[Minarvia]

From SkepticGinger -

-This is the first MRI study to report differences in brain structure size between low and highly hypnotizable, healthy, right-handed young adults. Participants were stringently screened for hypnotic susceptibility with two standardized scales, and then exposed to hypnotic analgesia training to control cold pressor pain. Only the highly hypnotizable subjects (HHs) who eliminated pain perception were included in the present study. These HHs, who demonstrated more effective attentional and inhibitory capabilities, had a significantly (P < 0.003) larger (31.8%) rostrum, a corpus callosum area involved in the allocation of attention and transfer of information between prefrontal cortices, than low hypnotizable subjects (LHs). These results provide support to the neuropsychophysiological model that HHs have more effective frontal attentional systems implementing control, monitoring performance and inhibiting unwanted stimuli from conscious awareness, than LHs.-

Hmmm...I would like to think it's a physical difference in me rather than the fact that I could, albeit unconsciously, be uncooperative.

But the last sentence eludes me a bit. It seems to say that Highly Hypnotisable subjects have MORE effective control over unwanted stimuli and MORE effective control over attention? That sounds like it should be the other way around, to me. ?

Ack...it seems I really have an ineffective brain today... Wait...maybe THAT's my problem...

 

[Greedo]

Before I became a skeptic, I received hypnosis from my psychologist.

It did nothing. I felt nothing. Utter nonsense.

 

[quarky]

Buy my crap.

Repetition works.

Um, half price sale, today only, on my crap.)

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...Someone telling me to relax my toes and feet (WTF?) would have just made me giggle.

Well it keeps going all the way until you get to the top of your head. I used to get seriously bored.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Before I became a skeptic, I received hypnosis from my psychologist.

It did nothing. I felt nothing. Utter nonsense.

Sample size of one, I'd keep that in mind.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

From SkepticGinger -
-[snip] These results provide support to the neuropsychophysiological model that HHs have more effective frontal attentional systems implementing control, monitoring performance and inhibiting unwanted stimuli from conscious awareness, than LHs.-

Hmmm...I would like to think it's a physical difference in me rather than the fact that I could, albeit unconsciously, be uncooperative.

But the last sentence eludes me a bit. It seems to say that Highly Hypnotisable subjects have MORE effective control over unwanted stimuli and MORE effective control over attention? That sounds like it should be the other way around, to me. ?

Ack...it seems I really have an ineffective brain today... Wait...maybe THAT's my problem...

It would seem HHs are better at tuning stuff out of their stream of consciousness. I'm pretty sure mine doesn't even ever stop multitasking let alone shut down altogether.

 

[Minarvia]

It would seem HHs are better at tuning stuff out of their stream of consciousness. I'm pretty sure mine doesn't even ever stop multitasking let alone shut down altogether.

Oh, that makes sense! I read it quite a different way.