0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I'm sorry neilep. Our current psychology science is still lacking in explaining the complexities of the mind. There's still no agreeable definition of hypnosis until this time.Although, you can observe works being done in NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) to further expand your understanding of this topic. Richard Bandler (NLP Founder) didn't claim to understand what is exactly happening in our heads, but he found beautiful things which works without the need to dissect every inch of the brain cell.His works helps people with multitudes of mental problem from phobias to insomnia in a surprisingly short time. Derren Brown, a renown mentalists (mind magician) performed his mind blowing performance with the help of this technology.
i dislike NLP. neurolinguistic programming.. it's pretty much pseudoscience as far as i'm aware. the conclusions of the research that has been done into using the scientific method is not flattering of it. derren brown might be using NLP, but really, i would say his work is much more grounded in psychology. of course to a lay person it sounds much more complicated (and therefore impressive) to say that he is using neurolinguistic programming than "mere psychology" - which he is free to do, as free as he is to say he was taught these techniques by a tribe of wise elephants residing in the himalayas.there has been some truly scientific, academic research into hypnosis. it's definitely not what you used to see in magic shows, with people acting like chickens all over the show. it's more for medicinal purposes.. there are reports of subjects going through otherwise painful surgery using only hypnosis through the past 2 centuries - http://www.institute-shot.com/hypnosis_pain_utility.htmthere is debate going on between whether or not hypnosis is a "state" or whether it is social enactment, and this debate has been going on for quite a while, around 30 years i think. people do not become unconscious, asleep (though they may fall asleep while under hypnosis, they are no longer hypotised!) unaware of their surroundings or in any way under the complete control of the hypnotist, not ever, despite what some lawsuits might claim. under hypnosis people are still under control of their own bodies and minds - it would be impossible to make a person strip, for example, if they really didn't want to. whether or not hypnotism is an actual state is more of an academic argument than a practical one.i have been hypnotised as part of a group, and i guess while experience may vary, i found it to be akin to being in a warm bath with your eyes closed and your mind empty - except that someone is instructing you! i would say it is a kind of suspension of control (which psychologists call suggestibility), which is giving over your mind to the other person and letting them instruct you on what to think of or do. again, i must make clear though, this can never be used against the wishes of the hypnotised, because they are still under control, they are just allowing the hypnotist to direct them in the same way that a person driving a car might stop and ask for directions, except much more therapeutically . i would also say it's comparable to the experience of meditation.psychologists know very little about sleep, dreaming and lucid dreaming compared to the processes that happen during the waking hours. sleep and dreaming always seem to be beyond the reach of psychology. we know what happens without sleep using case studies - hallucinations, microsleep, inability to pay attention, mood swings, problems with working memory. what happens without dreams is a mystery of course, because nobody can stop people dreaming without also stopping them sleeping! it's possible that the hallucinations suffered due to lack of sleep are the brains way of compensating without REM (which seems to be the regenerative and most necessary stage of sleep).to answer your specific question about lucid dreaming and hypnosis. i think lucid dreaming and hypnosis are two very seperate processes, but there may be some overlap in the usage of areas of the brain in both lucid dreaming and hypnosis as they both require some degree of mental direction and control, but this is just my own musing. to be sure you had a lucid dream - were you aware that you were dreaming while asleep, and controlled the plot of the dream? that is a true lucid dream - knowing you dreaming isn't enough for something to be a lucid dream. psychologists have influenced dreams by using external stimuli on sleeping participants, like flicking small amounts of water at their face - participants reported at a much higher rate than a control group that they dreamed of water. the same sort of thing is likely to be happening with your radio.if you have any questions or want me to clear anything up/rephrase, feel free, this is an area of psychology i love 
Binaural beats or binaural tones are auditory processing artifacts, or apparent sounds, the perception of which arises in the brain independent of physical stimuli. This effect was discovered in 1839 by Heinrich Wilhelm Dove.The brain produces a phenomenon resulting in low-frequency pulsations in the loudness of a perceived sound when two tones at slightly different frequencies are presented separately, one to each of a subject's ears, using stereo headphones. A beating tone will be perceived, as if the two tones mixed naturally, out of the brain. The frequency of the tones must be below about 1,000 to 1,500 hertz for the beating to be heard. The difference between the two frequencies must be small (below about 30 Hz) for the effect to occur; otherwise, the two tones will be heard separately and no beat will be perceived.Binaural beats are of interest to neurophysiologists investigating the sense of hearing. Second (and more controversially), binaural beats reportedly influence the brain in more subtle ways through the entrainment of brainwaves and can be used to produce relaxation and other health benefits such as pain relief.
Thank you Glovesforfoxes for your concise and informative reply.Yes, I too have seen pictures of conscious people having surgery performed on them with no apparent use of anaesthesia whilst hypnotised.Very interesting to hear your recollection of being hypnotised. So, even though your mind is open to suggestion it's not completely a blank canvas if you have a defence mechanism which has ultimate control over what is being suggested. Clearly, being hypnotised only controls certain areas of the mind.I can vouch for the little known aspects of sleep. Having been the sunjext of many studies on many occasions through out my life. Yes, these were two very specific lucid dreams where I had control of myself only in the dream. I could not control the dreams outcome though but was able to control my own orientation. I could run, walk, kneel, crouch , swim and fly. I could see a place in the distance and go there. Though, I did not control the nature of the place I was visiting.Being aware I am dreaming is virtually a daily occurrence with me and it's always during that few moments before one opens one eyes.These are most certainly not lucid. It's funny how the moment one allows external stimuli in the way of visual cues upon opening ones eyes returns consciousnous immediately (well..within a few seconds).........except sleep walking !I agree that REM is essential...I think without REM sleep we'd all go catatonic....I think we need to dream !Thank you again for your great information.
Hypnosis is a way to reach an altered state of consciousness in which people are more susceptible to suggestions. There are several ways to reach an altered state of consciousness other then the classic hypnosis, for example during sports, sex, dancing, listening to music etc (I think most of them involve highly focused attention). Hypnosis is used because it is a reliable way to evoke and sustain this state, and it is easy to give suggestions during it.
The hypnotized person can make judgment of what is good or bad. You can't force an otherwise shy girl to lift her skirt above her knees in public.
That's true. But sometimes, things can get more complicated than that. For example, if you made her believe that she's all alone, in her bathroom, getting ready to take a shower... Well, you'll get the idea. The same way some nut job religious leaders and politicians today asking you to kill someone or go to war because if you don't, then you might be killed instead.
Yes, hypnosis could been also done informally. See here how Derren Brown hypnotized somebody by using NLP technique. Very interesting!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=befugtgikMg
QuoteThat's true. But sometimes, things can get more complicated than that. For example, if you made her believe that she's all alone, in her bathroom, getting ready to take a shower... Well, you'll get the idea. The same way some nut job religious leaders and politicians today asking you to kill someone or go to war because if you don't, then you might be killed instead.this is completely incorrect. you can't make her believe that she is in a place, but you can help her to imagine that she is, which is very different.
And where lots of money is at stake sometimes science is not welcomed.
This video is most likely staged, and I think this kind of effect is only reachable in 1 out of 100 or 1000 cases (I'm not blaming them for staging it, having to wait 100 cases just to demonstrate a simple technique would be a terrible waste of money and time). It needs a highly susceptible person and lots of other factors to be perfectly aligned. And even then, imprinting BMX letter by letter seems almost impossible for me.
Yes, it is all impossible if you still viewing this topic from the eye of modern psychology. How long would they take to hypnotize somebody again? Just Google for "Rapid Hypnosis Induction", and you'll see the difference.It's up to you to decide.
The same way, a chemists have a very good understanding of chemical reactions, but it doesn't mean that they can defeat a chef in a cooking competition. That's the way I see it.
then why are NLP advocates using scientific lingo in order to make it seem to joe public that it is scientific? the very name of it is deceptive. if it isn't science, why use a name that pretends that it is?
your analogy is false. you can say NLP is art and psychology is science. psychological theory is science, sure, to the highest degree it possibly could be a science.