the boundaries of hypnotherapy

[Guest guest]

Hi Steve, You wrote on bodymind:

<< I am a hypnotherapist.

I specialize in what most would consider impossible, but it's fun ) >>

 

I have long been fascinated by the possibilities of what a hypnotist with

imagination might be able to accomplish. I'm not a hypnotist myself, but I

have watched many over the years and I've read a number of books on the

subject [e.g. Ericksen].

 

A new age mantra is " We create our own reality " . I sincerely believe this is

true to a MUCH greater extent than most people realize. At the same time,

when we came into this physical experience we " agreed " to certain basic

ground rules (e.g. there will be gravity) which most people find real hard to

disagree with. Yet I've read where some monks many decades ago were able to

levitate ... which caused one heck of a stir in the church.

 

Jesus said in effect that we could do all that he did; it's just that we

didn't have the " faith " that he did.

 

It's my layperson understanding that the conscious mind is the " gatekeeper "

that applies rational logic to things we might consider doing, and that

hypnosis is able to sneak past the gatekeeper so to speak, and hence bring

many possible actions into the realm of possibility. How does that jive with

your understanding?

 

What kinds of " impossible " things have you been able to accomplish so far

with hypnotism? How would you describe what you feel are the " limits " for

what can be accomplished with hypnotism?

 

Since I'm writing about some pretty " far out " stuff, if you'd feel more

comfortable establishing a private dialogue with me that would be fine.

 

Rich in Minnesota rputman

 

A Bumper Sticker for Women

IF THEY DON'T HAVE CHOCOLATE IN HEAVEN,

I AIN'T GOING.

 

<A HREF= " http://EarnSave.ownanewbusiness.com " >Get paid for what you've been

doing for free.</A>

http://EarnSave.ownanewbusiness.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I was so intrigued by hypnosis, I became one.

 

 

rputman wrote:

>

> Hi Steve, You wrote on bodymind:

> << I am a hypnotherapist.

> I specialize in what most would consider impossible, but it's fun ) >>

>

> I have long been fascinated by the possibilities of what a hypnotist with

> imagination might be able to accomplish. I'm not a hypnotist myself, but I

> have watched many over the years and I've read a number of books on the

> subject [e.g. Ericksen].

 

It's the imagination of the subject that counts. Many people have a mystical

view of hypnosis; they think the hynotist can change people. Many hypnotists

like to keep it that way

 

Truth is that all hypnosis is self-hypnosis. Listening to a hypnotist is very

much like listening to a tape of a hypnotist. It's a person talking. You can

make your own tapes. Most hypnosis is just relaxing and reaching the alpha

level of brain waves, just like the Silva Method. It's really what many

mystics call contemplation. Many self-improvement books suggest that one

repeat their goal to themselves as they are falling off to sleep each night;

hypnotists call that a somnambulistic trance, ooooooo; this will take several

sessions, hehe.

 

Stage hypnosis is a totally different thing. It's a show, a stage show and it's

more illusion than hynosis.

 

 

> It's my layperson understanding that the conscious mind is the " gatekeeper "

> that applies rational logic to things we might consider doing, and that

> hypnosis is able to sneak past the gatekeeper so to speak, and hence bring

> many possible actions into the realm of possibility. How does that jive with

> your understanding?

 

That's the black and white definition of the conscious mind. That's the

definition that fits best with theories of hypnosis. Truth is, the

conscious mind is not very logical at all, if it were, would we have all

the problems we have? Yah right, I know, it was a logical decision at

the time, but now it's no longer logical so I need a hypnotist to dislodge

it from my subconscious. Why? If I can see that a decision of long ago

is no longer working in my life, why can't I just dislodge it myself? Now

some hypnotist will come along and tell me that I have " parts " that are in

conflict with one another and that they need mediation, heh. I've heard

all the theories. I don't have parts, I am one, just one.

 

Most people have no conscious mind, that is, they are not conscious. They

think they are conscious, but they are not. They spend their money according

to what the big advertisers are pushing, and think they are doing it on their

own free will. If they were conscious they would not accept those suggestions.

 

 

You see? Why would we need to bypass the conscious mind at all? If you want

to levitate, but the " collective agreement " is stopping you, then just

consciously

imagine that you are the one person that is able to overcome that sort of

stuff.

 

Sorry for the hypnosis bashing. In the end, if you believe it's true, it's

true for you. And that fact will make all I say just hogwash.

 

Everything I write is just my own opinion.

 

Dave.

[Guest guest]

Dave,

 

You have *much* to learn about hypnosis.

Your training was lacking

 

steve

[Guest guest]

All of Daves comments are accurate in my opinion, in fact, all we are discussing

is mere nomeclature of hypnosis. But, if you read each sentance and take it's

own meaning at face value; it's accurate! (or at least congruent with the way I

percieve the world!)

 

Nice to have a different view occasionally, how're you getting on with your

" levitation " Dave?

 

I'm interested in any results of what you've acheived in performing tasks

through your " hypnosis - training / meditation (whatever - insert your favoured

adverb!) that would normally be considered " impossible "

 

I too have done the Silva BLS, and dabbled in NLP ( & DHE) - it certainly opened

my eyes to something else that was going on in the universe that I never learnt

in my physics degree!

 

Cheers

 

Simon Clifford

Kidderminster, UK.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hello simon,

 

>All of Daves comments are accurate in my opinion,

 

Kewl, you are entitled to an opinion. Accuracy is not required of opinions.

 

>in fact, all we are discussing is mere nomeclature of hypnosis.

>But, if you read each sentance and take it's own meaning at face value;

>it's accurate! (or at least congruent with the way I percieve the world!)

 

Congruent with your world view perhaps.

But understanding is not necessary for congruence, is it?

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

>Truth is that all hypnosis is self-hypnosis. Listening to a hypnotist is

very

>much like listening to a tape of a hypnotist. It's a person talking. You

can

>make your own tapes.

 

While hypnosis can be considered self-hypnosis in that the

individual makes the change, many situations do require a guide.

Phobias don't resolve too well with tapes.

 

>Most hypnosis is just relaxing and reaching the alpha level of

>brain waves, just like the Silva Method.

 

There is no relationship between relaxing and hypnosis

while you *can* relax, there is no inherent relationship.

 

Neither is there a relationship between brainwaves and hypnosis,

other than you will have brainwaves still when hypnotized.

 

>It's really what many mystics call contemplation.

>Many self-improvement books suggest that one repeat their goal

>to themselves as they are falling off to sleep each night;

 

Not really. Hypnosis is the bypassing of the critical judgement factor

of the conscious mind. Contemplation doesn't inherently do that.

 

>hypnotists call that a somnambulistic trance,

 

No, somnambulism is characterized by suggestible amnesia

or suggestible anesthesia.

 

>Stage hypnosis is a totally different thing. It's a show, a stage show

>and it's more illusion than hynosis.

 

It's still bypassing the ‘critical factor' no illusion needed.

 

 

>That's the black and white definition of the conscious mind.

>That's the definition that fits best with theories of hypnosis.

 

It fit the theories of the 1930's. Of course, medical doctors were still

bleeding their patients up until 1900 or so.

It's just unfortunate that 1930's hypnosis is still taught.

 

>Truth is, the conscious mind is not very logical at all,

>if it were, would we have all the problems we have?

 

Granted, your arguments are not very logical ;-)

 

>Yah right, I know, it was a logical decision at the time,

>but now it's no longer logical so I need a hypnotist to dislodge

>it from my subconscious. Why? If I can see that a decision of long ago

>is no longer working in my life, why can't I just dislodge it myself?

 

You obviously have little experience with phobias.

 

>Now some hypnotist will come along and tell me that I have

> " parts " that are in conflict with one another and that they need

>mediation, heh. I've heard all the theories.

>I don't have parts, I am one, just one.

 

Just as you go to a foot doctor for a sore tooth or blurry eyes, right?

Maybe you prefer an ophthalmologist for an ingrown toenail?

Hey, there's only one you!

 

>Most people have no conscious mind, that is, they are not

>conscious.

 

That may be the case for you ;-)

 

>They think they are conscious, but they are not. They

>spend their money according to what the big advertisers

>are pushing, and think they are doing it on their own free will.

>If they were conscious they would not accept those suggestions.

 

How could there be a conscious ‘part' or an unconscious ‘part'

You just stated above there's no such thing as parts.

 

>Sorry for the hypnosis bashing. In the end, if you believe it's true,

>it's true for you. And that fact will make all I say just hogwash.

 

You simply don't know hypnosis.

I won't hold your ignorance against you

 

>Everything I write is just my own opinion.

 

Kewl! Opinions are great! Even if you don't understand the subject

 

steve

[Guest guest]

Hi Rich,

 

 

>Hi Steve, You wrote on bodymind:

><< I am a hypnotherapist.

>I specialize in what most would consider impossible, but it's fun ) >>

>

>I have long been fascinated by the possibilities of what a hypnotist with

>imagination might be able to accomplish. I'm not a hypnotist myself, but I

>have watched many over the years and I've read a number of books on the

>subject [e.g. Ericksen].

 

Do keep in mind that Dr. Erickson was in Med school in the 1920s

and while he developed some new techniques of his own, his basic hypnosis

skills were from the 1920s. Dr. Erickson is worshipped world wide as the

god of hypnosis. When one is a god, it's hard to be humble enough to further

one's training and skills.

 

>A new age mantra is " We create our own reality " . I sincerely believe this is

>true to a MUCH greater extent than most people realize.

 

I would agree with that statement.

Ever see the movie 'the matrix'?

 

>At the same time, when we came into this physical experience we

> " agreed " to certain basic ground rules (e.g. there will be gravity)

>which most people find real hard to disagree with.

>Yet I've read where some monks many decades ago were able to

>levitate ... which caused one heck of a stir in the church.

 

Boeing airplane company recently announced it was researching anti-gravity.

See Jane's website:

http://www.janes.com/aerospace/civil/news/jdw/jdw020729_1_n.shtml

 

My own understanding is that if one person can do something, then others

can do the same

 

>Jesus said in effect that we could do all that he did; it's just that we

>didn't have the " faith " that he did.

 

Faith in the ability?

or faith in God?

 

>It's my layperson understanding that the conscious mind is the " gatekeeper "

>that applies rational logic to things we might consider doing, and that

>hypnosis is able to sneak past the gatekeeper so to speak, and hence bring

>many possible actions into the realm of possibility. How does that jive

with

>your understanding?

 

That's a pretty good description of hypnosis

 

>What kinds of " impossible " things have you been able to accomplish so far

>with hypnotism?

 

I will share that when I have sufficient consistency.

I believe in double-blind studies which show statistical significance.

 

>How would you describe what you feel are the " limits " for

>what can be accomplished with hypnotism?

 

I don't put limits on things for the most part anymore. I used too.

I've had too many of my deeply held beliefs explode in my face <ouch>

I don't like being humbled in that way. It hurts right in the

pride ;-)

 

I do maintain my faith in my God.

That is because I still find the Bible to be accurate.

Science keeps crumbling though.

We can fly to the moon, possibly defy gravity, etc.

There has been shown the possibility that light may vary in its speed...

Goodbye E=MC^2 if that is true!

 

>Since I'm writing about some pretty " far out " stuff, if you'd feel more

>comfortable establishing a private dialogue with me that would be fine.

 

Perhaps.

 

Steve

[Guest guest]

Hello Dave,

 

I realize now that it probably came across like that to you.

I apologize to you for the method I chose to bring out the errors of the post.

Personal attacks were not my intent.

I will do my best to be more careful in my future responses.

 

sincerely,

 

steve

[Guest guest]

steve wrote:

 

>

> Granted, your arguments are not very logical ;-)

 

> You obviously have little experience with phobias.

 

> >Most people have no conscious mind, that is, they are not

> >conscious.

>

> That may be the case for you ;-)

 

> You simply don't know hypnosis.

> I won't hold your ignorance against you

 

> Kewl! Opinions are great! Even if you don't understand the subject

 

 

Steve,

 

Although your post was addressed to Simon, each of your statements above

refer to one of my statements and are personal attacks on me. (None of the

cute little smileys negate the insults). Where did I personally attack

*you*?

 

 

I simply refuse to engage you in a flame war, sorry.

 

Dave.

[Guest guest]

Hi Steve,

 

You seem to be taking the position of the resident authority on

hypnosis. You've told both Simon and myself that we lack

understanding of the subject and you told me that my training

was lacking, which is sorta the old " My teacher/guru is better

than you teacher/guru " thing. You also said " Hope I don't

disappoint as I clarify things. " which is to say that what you

say on the matter is authoritative to such an extent that we

might be disappointed as *you* give us the facts. Am I misreading

you?

 

 

You made the statement " I specialize in what most would consider

impossible, but it's fun ) " .

 

But when Rich and Simon asked for examples, you refused to say...

 

" I will share that when I have sufficient consistency.

I believe in double-blind studies which show statistical significance. "

 

 

I don't understand this. You said that it's your speciality and that

you enjoy it. That implies that you're already doing it on a regular

basis. They're only asking what it is that you specialize in that most

would consider impossible, and I'm asking also. We're not asking for

documented double blind studies, just for some examples?

 

Come'on cough it up pal!

 

 

Dave

 

--

Mystic-Path

[Guest guest]

Hello,

 

 

>You seem to be taking the position of the resident authority on

>hypnosis. You've told both Simon and myself that we lack

>understanding of the subject and you told me that my training

>was lacking, which is sorta the old " My teacher/guru is better

>than you teacher/guru " thing. You also said " Hope I don't

>disappoint as I clarify things. " which is to say that what you

>say on the matter is authoritative to such an extent that we

>might be disappointed as *you* give us the facts.

>Am I misreading you?

 

It is not my intent to be a 'resident guru'.

It is only my intent to help the list realize that the information given

was not accurate. Nothing personal was intended.

There are well over 500 list members here. Many of whom do not

know hypnosis. My intent was to share with them.

 

>You made the statement " I specialize in what most would consider

>impossible, but it's fun ) " .

>But when Rich and Simon asked for examples, you refused to say...

> " I will share that when I have sufficient consistency.

>I believe in double-blind studies which show statistical significance. "

 

That's right.

I do not care to share of that particular area.

 

>I don't understand this. You said that it's your speciality and that

>you enjoy it. That implies that you're already doing it on a regular

>basis.

 

yup

 

>They're only asking what it is that you specialize in that most

>would consider impossible, and I'm asking also. We're not asking for

>documented double blind studies, just for some examples?

 

That I specialize in it does not mean I do it exclusively.

 

>Come'on cough it up pal!

 

<smile>

 

steve