Slashdot Mirror
Hypnosis Gets Positive Recognition
An anonymous reader writes to tell us the New York Times is reporting that, despite its negative history, hypnosis is now getting some favorable attention from neuroscientists. From the article: "These extensive feedback circuits mean that consciousness, what people see, hear, feel and believe, is based on what neuroscientists call "top down processing." What you see is not always what you get, because what you see depends on a framework built by experience that stands ready to interpret the raw information - as a flower or a hammer or a face."
Guy: It didn't work, i still think its a crock.
Oh, well I tried
public class null extends java applet { System.out.print ("Tabula Rasa"); }
Actually... thats sort of how hypnosis works - its considered a lowered state of conciousness (though not quite sleeping) where the subject is extremely succeptible to suggestions, and thus acts outs those suggestions (which is why hypnosis is not considered valid legal evidence)
...Open source is the best solution for everything. I will use open source, O great slashdot ...
Perception is reality. Which is why two people can look at the same facts and come to opposite conclusions. Change the perception, change the reality. A marketer's dream.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
It works. Really.
In light of the above, reading A Rimbaud is illuminating. Rimbaud forced himself to see what he thought of as his poetic vision. He would stare mercilessly into a pool until he saw a fabled city. William Blake is another who willed visions. Rimbaud gave up poetry at a very early age and turned to gun running, but also later spoke of science as the only worthwhile pursuit.
My newest DYI project is an EEG machine to compliment my interest in neurobiology and slow wave sleep. For those who want an in to hypnosis, biofeedback and sleep "EEG.pl is an open repository for software, publications and datasets related to the analysis of brain potentials: electroencephalogram (EEG), local field potentials (LFPs) and event related potentials (ERP)"
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
Will there come a day where the study of hypnosis, or other forms of cognitive suggestion, is abused by firms for marketing? Perhaps some allready are. What kind of privacy law would restrict this?
From a cold steel rail..
"The probe, called the Stroop test, presents words in block letters in the colors red, blue, green and yellow. The subject has to press a button identifying the color of the letters. The difficulty is that sometimes the word RED is colored green. Or the word YELLOW is colored blue. " Hypnotised subjects recognised the words more often than unhypnotised subjects.
The Stroop test also differentiates between subjects with a thick corpus callosum and those with a thin corpus callosum - eg: left handers and right handers. Considering the small sample was this factor controlled for?
Also psych experiments use very small samples and have to use the repeated measures statistical technique. This can identify significance but is restricted in other information it can provide.
Anybody try any of the self hypnosis software like Virtual Hypnotist successfully? I've tried a few opensource/free programs, and they don't seem to work.
Note that I'm interested in self hypnosis purely from the scientific-curiosity/entertainment/skeptic point of view. Not looking for serious therapy stuff here (Office Space comes to mind).
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Don't think about polar bears!
+++ATH0
I remember talking to a psychologist once who, once learning that I was a computer guy, suggested that combining a form of auto-entraining hypnosis with some creative input devices you could easily make an immersive environment with today's technology. The only problem is that by allowing yourself to be hypnotised you're putting yourself into a highly suggestive state (duh, that's how it works) and as such you really need to trust the creator of the experience that you are being fed. If, for example, you're experiencing an online environment, you're allowing random unknown people to have intimate access to your mind. Not exactly something I'd be interested in doing. But consider the fiction of Neuromancer: "a consensual hallucination". That's what we're talking about here. The dangers experienced by Case were real and could lead to his death if he took on a system he couldn't control. Regardless, Case accepted the risks because the rewards were so great.. perhaps that kind of attitude is something we should strive towards. Our aversion to risk is limiting our sensory perception of our shared experiences. We're limited to screens and keyboards. Sure, our screens have gotten bigger and more colourful and we've got joysticks and mice, and surround sound, but the experience of cyberspace is so poor compared to meatspace. And that's not getting any better.
How we know is more important than what we know.
"Perception is reality. Which is why two people can look at the same facts and come to opposite conclusions. Change the perception, change the reality. A marketer's dream."
*Geeks are getting laid!*
Sorry chief, it doesn't work.
Hypnosis might have a negative reputation if you buy the movie "mind control" version, which has nothing to do with reality, and shame on anyone who even thought it was. It has long been a testable theory, and research has shown that every 90 minutes or so the brain goes into a slightly hypnotic state, daydreaming if you will. This is a natural process of the brain. It's still not known how or why this happens, but the effect has been known for a long time.
It's a very weird thing to demonstrate to someone who's long held the negative "its' a crock of shit" view based on what they've seen on movies or in stage hypnosis.
I'll give you an example of something that a psychotherapist (long story) did for me. When you get into that relaxed state, that's not quite as relaxed as sleeping, but its still a very numb relaxing pleasant feeling, the hypnotist "tests" your state in numerous ways. The most popular one is telling you your eyes are glued shut and no matter how hard you try you cannot open them... then a few minutes later asks you to try, but you will not be able. Every time this happens to me, I *KNOW* I can open my eyes, I'm fucking positive about it, I *KNOW* they're not glued shut, I *KNOW* the hypnotist is a lying bastard, full of shit.. but you know what... I don't wanna... I like them shut. It's difficult to explain, but you just find yourself wanting to go along with fun little things like that.
That's a crude little insight into what a hypnotic state feels like and the level of "control" anyone has over you. Try it yourself, you dont have to believe in it. If anything, its just a great way of relaxation. I use it at night as a cure for insomnia. A guided session helps me get to sleep within about 10 minutes. You might argue that this is just the power of suggestion, or the placebo effect... but that's exactly what's its meant to be.
I also make my own mp3's depending on what I'm looking for.. If preparing for a job interview I run through the interview over and over again in a hypnotic state. It's a great way of mental rehearsing something. Better than just doing it in front of a mirror....
The whole idea of 'top-down' or cognitive drive for the sensory systems is very addictive, since among other things, it allows you to explain perception as some type of baysian method. However it is simply untrue. The visual system is replete with examples, from the Craik-O'Brien-Cornsweet illusion, to stuff like Julesz' Random Dot stereograms (that CANNOT have top down effects), that defy a top-down framework.
Even with effects that might be top-down modulated (like illusory contours) the physiological evidence is totally towards these things happening in the early nervous system. Although there is definitely some feedback present even in this area, one has to consider that RC constants for most neurons are about ~10ms, and much of our perception takes place in ~100ms. These timeframes are VERY well studied, and generally accepted.. and of that 100ms, about 50ms of the time is the signal travelling from the retina to the cortex (see Bullier & DeAngelis, among others). That doesn't leave much room for dramatic top down feedback for general sensory perception.... Your visual system, bottom up, manages to figure out edges, what colors to fill them in with, various levels of depth, what's moving (in relation to your eye movements.. no easy challenge.. how can you tell when your eye moves whether you're looking at a pen, or a moving streak?) and in relation to what else, all within 100-150ms of the stimulus. That just doesn't leave time for very dramatic 'high level' feedback like this article assumes.
Although I've only mentioned vision, there are similar issues in all sensory modalities except audition, which is a special case, since audition is optimized for temporal accuity, but it has its own issues that make it look like much of your perception happens without much top-down activity.
From our current understanding it appears that top-down activity does two things: 1) Equalize 'gain' in the sensory system.. if the amplification levels across you're visual field were different, you wouldn't be able to tell whether a line was something that had to do with the outside world or noise. And 2) Modulate acuity for attention.. which is very complicated in and of itself, but there is good evidence that most early perception occurs even in areas we aren't attending to.
The main 'evidence' in this article is from a 'brain scanner' which is probably fMRI. As one of my professor's liked to say, "In fMRI we show people a picture of their ass, then a picture of a hole in the ground, and subract them." Most fMRI statistics include averaging across areas... which is nice, until you remember that our brain isn't on a sphere, but something with fissures in it, and so you just averaged two things that were (cortically speaking) in other worlds (since because of the fissure they might be centimeters apart! Remember the Cortex is a laminar archiecture around the surface)... so I'm highly skeptical, to say the least.
Hypnosis indeed works.
Primarily, I use an open source (GPL) program called "Virtual Hypnotist. It took time to get it to work for me (close to a year using it daily), but now I can under when I want to.
I've primarily used it so far to help overcome my shyness, especially around women. So far it's been working. I've also been using it assist with lucid dreams.
"It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
I, and my two sisters, were delivered by an Ostopath/hypnotist. Our mother said she felt no pain but had no drugs during any of the three deliveries. He had worked with her during preganecies, implanting the suggestion that she would feel no pain and that "it would be a beautiful experience". Pretty effective, as my younger sister was a breach presentation, and the doctor was able to move the baby around so that a Cesarian was avoided.
"How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb
now I'm thinking about thinking about polar bears!
Until the erstwhile owner of the limb shows up, eh?
Nothing to say here... move along
...look them both up on Google, and your favourite peer-to-peer file sharing thingumy, and I'm sure you will find both quite enlightening to, um, "play with".
/J
There are some very interesting/good MP3s and AVis by Bandler -- and Milton Erickson's material is also worth spending some time over.
Deep techies -- programmers in particular -- will likely find some of the NLP techniques quite interesting, especially if "O'Reilly's Mind Hacks" seemed like an interesting title.
Enjoy!
Nice to see this topic finally getting some more mainstream media coverage -- hypnosis is almost magickal, isn't it?
Bon Voyage...
That wasn't a very good article actually. Top down this...flashing lights/colors that - close to the same old hypnosis as gimmick POV. Hypnosis in one form or another is at the heart of what is called "mental Illness". Even healthy people struggle with mental tapes that play over and over in the mind. A kid getting upset after being yelled at by her parents and called "no good..lazy..a floosey etc" the parents is actually getting set up for hypnotic conditioning. Any shock suspends what hypnotists often call an individuals "critical factors" or the ability to maintain reason, focus, objectivity etc. When critical factors are suspended the door to the sub conscious is accessed and able to receive suggestions. A kid called "no good" while being stressed and upset will find those thoughts in the mind and struggling with them will make them worse since concentration is a function of hypnosis and all struggle deepend the psychic funk. One reason people can't break habits is because they worry, struggle and analyze the problem too much. Indeed, one reason therapy often backfires is because the client is asked to get deeper into focusing on what is wrong instead of becoming objective to it. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is essentially a hypnotic problem. People under severe stress react and the traumatic elements get inside a person's subconscious where they re-animate again and again. A persons conditioned reflex response mechanism which is like the body's memory can feel pain from an ordeal that they were not even aware of when the traumatic event was taking place. Many soldiers and others subjected to stresses that they are shocked by have a consciousness that is overwhelmed as if like a conductor falling into an orchestra. When people dont know how to handle their emotions, or are subject to extreme stresses,they lose some conscious awareness and fall into the gears of their own cognitive and emotional machinery. That's the root for a tremendous amount of mental suffering. Not surprisingly many of the original psychic ruptures take place at home and in the schools when people are kids and get upset by the cruelties, neglects, family problems etc. Media, marketers and politicians etc use these mechanisms (even if only indirectly aware of what principles they are using) by emotionalizing groups of people and then giving them ideas and suggestions. WHen adds play that energizing music and give people feelings and ideas they are trying to condition them hypnotically. People will accept such motivations as if it came from them. Hypnotic elements are all around us and yet it's hardly recognized for what it is. A lot more people can be hypnotized that that article states. One reason people can't be hypnotized is because they are hypnotized already by lifes events and stresses. The correct way to use hypnosis to get someone to stop smoking would be to "un-hypnotize" them. Thats why when a person tries hypnosis for smoke cessation it only works for a little while. Hypnotists don't hypnotize people as much as take over a pre existing state. A fact people don't realize about hypnosis is that intellectual people and people who use their imaginations a lot are the best subjects for hypnosis. People who study a lot are used to focusing their minds and they tend to be sensitive to authority ( a good hypnotists greatest asset is a authoritarian manner) - all good conditions for hypnotic manipulation. One reason artists and such suffer is because they are very open in their own minds to all sorts of forces taking their objectivity captive.
I keep my books on hypnosis out of sight because I don't like the questions that follow when my friends see them. If you would like to learn more, start with some works by Milton Erickson. Anything is possible once you realize that your brain *makes* your reality.
Kind thoughts do not change the world
...the use of hypnosis to recover repressed memories?
I think the validity of that is still in question.
I have personally experienced the medicinal effects of hypnosis.
My doctor cured my migraines as a child through hypnosis. He has also cured
asthma through the same techniques with other children. If the disease involves
the mind, hypnosis is very effective.
When you think that the placebo effect is quite effective, consider being able
to influence the subconscious in order to clear symptoms that were artifically
created by the patient. Consider psychosomatic illnesses, where it's all in
the person's head. The symptoms could potentially be cleared through
hypnotic suggestion.
Consider smoking. As a smoker I know my triggers are certain situations.
Hypnosis could be used to 'nullify' these situations so that a person
could get enough willpower to quit.
I see many posts which make fun of hypnosis, but as someone who has benefitted
from it, I just see ignorance. Try it and then make an informed decision.
I'm a psychologist. Have the degree and everything to prove it. For full disclosure to any other psychologists out there, I'm a mixture of the neo-Freudian and sociocultural schools, with a dash of biogenetic. Personally, I view this as a good thing. There's been alot of bashing of hypnosis by both the scientific and the nonscientific communities for either it's 1) percieved goofiness (you're getting sleeppyyyyy...) or 2) the suggestability it causes. However, I find it to be a good tool if it's handled by somebody who is actually qualified to do it in a scientific manner. Most of the suggestability accounts are done by non professionals pretending to be professionals. They're mostly shame artists. But for a real hypnotist, the real value of hynopsis is not in recovering deep dark secrets, but for use as a tool of self-honesty, in bringing issues to light that people really know, but keep back by a thin layer of repression. If you dig any deeper than that, then you risk falling into the suggestability catagory.
Took them long enough. Maybe in another decade they'll conclude that meditation is a good way to relieve stress. Seriously, I wish people would read about these things before adopting negative stereotypes about them. Of course, a stereotype, by definition, is an uninformed opinion.
Experts: We don't believe in hypnosis.
Hypnotists: Yes, you do.
Experts: Okay.
xkcd.com - a webcomic of mathematics, love, and language.
What you're talking about is a person's interpretation, which is based on their biases, preferences, interests and other such factors. Reality is reality.
Take the recent invasion of Iraq, for instance. It is _fact_ that innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed by American soldiers and American bombs. That's reality. However, the interpretation of the situation by different people may differ. If you ask a neo-con or a redneck, chances are they'll justify the killing, for whatever reason. A conservative or a libertarian, on the other hand, would most likely point out that it is wrong to kill innocent civilians.
Of course people will have differing interpretations of reality. But reality itself is just that: reality.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Erickson was one of the first people to discover and utilise covert hypnosis.
l
Since he was an MD reportedly getting miracle results, the medical board assumed he was a crank and tried to remove his license. Twice.
The meetings both went the same way. Erickson would start talking in his monotonous drawl, which would be the only thing board members would remember, apart from letting him keep his license.
So much of what Milton did is mindblowing. One of his patients wanted to lose weight. Erickson hypnotised her so that, whilst eating, she would experience time going so slowly that each spoonful would subjectively take an hour to reach her mouth.
Perhaps one of the most interesting of his papers was his collaboration with Aldous Huxley.
There is a copy here, third item down:
http://www.geocities.com/franzbardon/erickson.htm
Disclaimer: I did not RTFA. I did get hypnotized back in August for smoking cessation purposes. Was a 1-2 pack a day smoker for about 10 years. Tried the patch (didnt work), the gum (tasted like crap), wellbutrin (gave me hives and made me not care about anything). Finally I tried hypnosys. Granted, I went into it believing it was going to work, and it did. Two 40 minute sessions later and I havent had a smoke and best of all, I wasnt irritable at all.
It's not as if the medically sanctioned psychiatrists are any more effective.
OR:
"It didn't work; I still think it's a crock. Well, here's your $500; I'm off to wax your car. See you tomorrow?"
Seriously though, my Psychology 1101 professor did research into hypnosis for pain control. She did an in-class demonstration showing (apparently) that a guy she'd been working with could endure having his hand in ice water for a longer time after hypnosis than before. She said the goal was to help people for whom pain medication isn't enough - like burn victims whose skin must be scraped over and over.
If you're talking the age of Mesmer, then yes, hypnosis had a somewhat negative history. But in the past few decades it's become much better understood and it's used to good effect in several medical fields.
Go to your favorite book search site and look for hypnosis in pain management. There's a lot of very well researched scientific literature out there. (Also a lot of crap, but that doesn't make the good stuff any less valid.)
A couple of years ago I spent a lot of time studying hypnosis and I brought up the subject with my stepfather, who's been practicing medicine for over fifty years. When I mentioned pain managment, he told me that he'd used hypnosis once to induce an anesthetic state in a patient in order to set a broken leg. I asked him why he didn't use it more often, and he said "Well, it's cheaper and probably safer than anesthesia, but it took me two hours to get him under enough to pop his bone back in." It's a lot faster to just shoot the patient up with lidocaine.
Not really what you want to have going on, having urges that some hypnotist installed in your mind, for the rest of your life.
Sorta like playing a Sony CD then?
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
What was amazing about Erikson was that he noticed that life is rife with trance states, most of them shallow, temporary, and skilfully deployed for survival purposes. Think about this the next time you get home from a tense commute without really remembering exactly how you operated the car.
He found somewhat more suggestible cases, and took advantage of what he saw as our natural facility with trances, and of our heavy reliance on metaphor to get through the day. (Of course, I oversimplify.) Plus he was a damn good psychiatrist. Basically, a prodigy. He would find ways of putting people into trances of various depths, for various lengths of time, using freaky techniques like the rhythm of his voice tuned to the listener's body responses, and barely noticeable emphasis on certain words, not unlike fictional characters in the Dune series. Not easy to reproduce.
His ideas later led to NLP, or Neuro-Linguistic Programming... YMMV.
Damn those pesky terrorists
Here is the original article by Amit Raz et al, published in 2002.
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
The only way to load a world view quickly into your brain is to import it from other people. To do this efficiently, your brain must be capable of entering a mode where it uncritically accepts information provided in spoken form (probably mostly from your parents, but other people may play a role). To avoid the risk of abuse, there must be some instinctive criteria that determine when this uncritical uploading of new information should occur. Hypnosis occurs under conditions which mimic the circumstances that satisfy these criteria.
Music: a super-stimulus for the perception of musicality. Musicality: a perceived aspect of speech.
I did at one point do a few weeks on hypnosis during a psycology course, hypnosis is over complicated by people.
There is no deep dark secret of how it works (Even stage hypnosis), its just simply getting a person to trust you and be relaxed enough with you for their mind to take what you're saying as true and not need to "vet" or check the information.
So if you tell a person when their in a hypnotic state that they don't need to smoke, and that they dont want to smoke. Their mind will just accept it, it bypasses the concious thinking process.
You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
Hypnosis found to alter the brain: Subjects see color where none exists http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2000/08.21/hyp nosis.html
After that, I sopped doubting that it works. The only question is, on whom and what % of the time.
Yeah, placebo normally plays a relatively substancial part in hypnosis. If you don't think hypnotism is possible, the chances are you won't be able to be hypnotised very easily, if at all.
I'm certainly no expert but I was interested in it myself about half a year ago and bought The New Encyclopedia of Stage Hypnotism. It has two main sections, one of them is more about the theory side of things (although it doesn't go into as much detail as some of the free websites I've read), and the other has a mind boggling huge array of methods and techniques for putting people into the state(s) of hypnosis and the things that are possible when it's achieved. There are some pretty amazing things people can do when in the deeper states of hypnosis, such as "feeling" the hypnotist touch them (on the back, for example) although the hypnotist doesn't actually touch them, instead the fingers are brought an few inches away from the skin. You can also anesthetise parts of the body, so the subject will feel no sensation at all, following this you could, for example, put a sterilised needle through the skin and leave no mark; no blood, no pain and with the subject fully conscious. You can make blisters appear on the skin simply by touching it, and make them disappear as well. There are lots of other amazing things that have slipped my mind atm. Chances are you'll have seen people like Derren Brown do these kind of things on TV (at least here in the UK anyway).
Both the theory (mainly) and practical have always intrigued me, I've never actually tried hypnotising anyone myself though.
And a special message for those who are sceptical... WRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!
well done! sexual contact without consent is *definately* a matter to be joked about... ... -rape.html]
[URL:http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21112005/140/f
I seriously hope the parent doesn't get modded as 'funny'. it's this sort of attitude that gets geeks our (unfair) reputation in some circles.
First, full disclosure: I am a trained hypnotist.
Pretty much anyone can be hypnotized, if they have enough functioning brain cells to hypnotize in the first place. The fact that you are able to operate a PC well enough to post on Slashdot pretty well indicates that you should be able to pass that particular criterion.
However, hypnosis is a consent state. You have to want to go into trance, you have to go along with it, you have to CHOOSE to follow the hypnotist's instructions. If you don't want to be hypnotized, there is not a lot that I, or anyone else, can do about it.
Further, even if you have agreed to go into hypnosis, even if you have gone into hypnosis, neither I nor anyone else can make you do anything you don't want to do. If a hypnotist tries to give someone a suggestion that they really don't want, they pop out of trance. Depending on the suggestion the hypnotist attempted, their first reaction on coming out may very well be to deck the hypnotist.
The guy who trained me mentioned that he learned VERY quickly to stand on the side of the subject where the guy COULDN'T deck him easily if this happened. He admitted to having learned this the hard way.
People naturally go into hypnosis, on their own, a minimum of twice a day: on their way to falling asleep, and on their way from sleeping to wide awake. It is an absolutely natural state of mind.