I've made some changes myself to the "hypnosis" and "hypnotherapy" articles
on Wikipedia.  I think it would be good if more people who knew about the
subject took time to get involved in helping to maintain the relevant Wikipedia
entries.  These are probably looked at by a lot of people who are  interested
in the subject, and they're pretty basic at the moment.  If  enough people
took just a few minutes to help improve these entries then they  could probably
be made much more helpful to people interested in the subject,  and the more
people edit the page the more balanced the representation hopefully  becomes.

_Hypnosis - Wikipedia, the  free encyclopedia_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnosis)

Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
College Principal & Executive  Director

Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist (NCH)
Registered  Psychotherapist (UKCP)
Member of the European Register of Psychotherapists  (ERP)
Fellow of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health  (RSPH)


The UK College of  Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy Ltd.
_www.UKhypnosis.com_ (http://www.ukhypnosis.com/)

Freephone (UK)  0800 195 9809
Fax: 01403 265 015
International +44(0)1403248266
UKCHH,  Suite 127, 17 Piries Place, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1BF

Hypno-CBTź is  the registered trademark of The UK College of Hypnosis &
Hypnotherapy  Ltd.
Registered in England as Company No. 05499462, UK Register of Learning
Providers No.10008042
VAT Registration 920 1916 52

UKCHH Ltd.  Disclaimer, Terms, & Copyright
Copyright (c) UKCHH Ltd., unless  otherwise stated. This email is
confidential and intended solely for the use of  the addressee. If you are not
the
intended recipient then the disclosure,  copying or distribution to others of
any
part or whole of this message is  strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
imediately and delete the  email.

This message has been scanned for viruses before sending. UKCHH  Ltd. accepts
no responsibility for infection and recommends you scan both email  and
contents.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Can we bring this thread to a close?  It seems to have strayed too far
beyond hypnotherapy into controversial paranormal claims.  I've posted
some material about Braid's discovery of hypnosis to try to engender
some more topic-relevant discussion.  I think we've heard enough about
ESP for the time being.

Donald Robertson
Moderator

> Winning the lottery may not be scientific proof,

Yes, it is!

Email us your predicted numbers *before* the lottery takes place. If you
get a significant number correct every time or almost every time, we can
subject that to statistical analysis.

Paddy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi all,

We still have a few places available at the reduced early booking rate for
the Certificate in Sports Hypnosis course on 30/31 January 2009.

This 2-day CSH Certificate course provides foundation level training in
sports psychology and sports hypnosis for qualified hypnotherapists. The
course is an even mixture of theory and practice, and plenty of
opportunities are provided to practice various techniques. Assessment is by
a short examination which you complete at home after the course.

The Certificate in Sports Hypnosis (Cert.SportsHyp) covers:

* History of Sports Hypnosis
* Assessments & case formulation
* Sports psychology theory
* Sports psychology interventions
* Integrating hypnosis into sports psychology
* Case Studies
* Practical applications

Early Booking: Ł245 (Saving Ł50).

For more information and to book your place, please see
http://www.sportshypnosis.org.uk/training-cert-hypno.html

Regards,

Gary

The Centre for Sports Hypnosis (CSH)
http://www.sportshypnosis.org.uk

> What people like me want is demonstrable proof. If psi exists, then
it
> can be either measured or statistically demonstrated. Where are
these
> studies that you keep referring to? (I'm curious, not trying to
pull you
> down. I'd be pleased as punch to find valid experiments showing
that psi
> does exist.)

And yet, there are *so* many others who don't give a crap about the
science.

I was trying to get on disability and was forced to take a psych test
on a day that was up in the triple digits; I was hot, sick, on
morphine, and I did not want to go through a three hour test. I was
hoping, desperately, for something to happen-- thinking about the
time when Carl Jung was in Sigmund Freud's office and he told Freud
he could make something unusual happen; a moment later there was a
loud rapping from Freud's bookcase. Astonished, Freud asked him to do
it again and his friend obliged; another loud rapping came from the
bookcase.

There was no bookcase, but suddenly there was a rumbling noise and
the picture on the opposite wall suddenly exploded into pieces. The
psychologist looked at it for a moment, then looked at me and asked
me if I believed in ESP-- a very odd question to ask considering the
circumstances, don't you think?

Not quite knowing where that was going to, I lied and said that I
didn't. The psychologist gave me an odd look, but let the matter go.
While I was rather pleased with myself, I eventually forgot about the
matter until I got the report back from the Social Security
Administration. They passed me and I got on disability, but there was
the comment in the middle of the report, "Subject does not believe in
ESP." The fact that that was there floored me more than anything.
Since when does a Government agency deal with the paranormal? Wasn't
that a tacit acknowledgment that "ESP" was a reality? Well, at least
as far as Big Brother was concerned?

I asked my doctor about it cuz I thought it had been a trick
question. She was surprised the psychologist even asked, but didn't
know *why* he asked either-- unless he knew, or suspected, that there
was more to his broken picture.

Jung had no problems with the idea that there were forces and
abilities that went beyond science. And apparently, neither did that
psychologist. Nor does the thought bother my doctor, a highly
intelligent, learned, and competent physician.

personally, I think scientific "proof" is highly over-rated. Not even
worth the paper it's printed on. But hey, knock yourself out: there
are a lot of studies and I'm sure you'll find them if ya take the
time to look.  Me, I have some more therapy sessions to go to resolve
to get my own wild talents (as the Military is so  fond of saying)
straightened out. Winning the lottery may not be scientific proof,
but it is a hell of a lot more satisfying.  <g>

Ron

> That's essentially what you-- and others want: do a trick and
  > prove to us psi exists-- and while you're at it, keep doing it until
  > we are satisfied that you aren't faking.

Well, don't talk for me.

What scientists realise is that their minds and powers of observation
are flawed. That's why they use measuring tools, statistics, and
double-blind experiments to attempt to take their personal prejudices
out of the answers.

What people like me want is demonstrable proof. If psi exists, then it
can be either measured or statistically demonstrated. Where are these
studies that you keep referring to? (I'm curious, not trying to pull you
down. I'd be pleased as punch to find valid experiments showing that psi
does exist.)

  > Scientists want the lay person to accept the idea
  > that there are invissible masssless particles that zip through us all
  > the time from space; particles we can't see, taste, feel or detect by
  > film...

Uh, no. Scientists hypothesise (based on prior evidence and missing
information) that these particles exist.

They then create experiments (double-blind wherever possible) to test
whether the hypothesis is valid (i.e. could be true) or invalid (i.e.
couldn't be true). A key element of an experiment is that it must
predict a result. If the prediction turns out correct, it confirms (not
proves) the hypothesis; if incorrect, it invalidates the hypothesis. (It
can be considered a proof if it's an either-or: For example, either
horses' feet all leave the ground at the same time during each canter,
or they don't.)

If the experiments -- which must be repeated by different scientists to
be considered seriously -- indicate that the hypothesis is valid, they
then call it a Theory. (In layman's terms, a Theory is what is "true".)
That theory is built on, creating further hypotheses and experiments
(and new theories), until they find the limitations of their theories,
and either refine them (as with Newtonian physics) or discard them (as
with Copernicus's theories).

Scientists don't consider their conclusions as the Truth. Instead, they
consider them as guidelines towards the truth.

If we were to reject the scientific method, and rely on our subjective
observations, then the sun and stars would still be circling the world,
the world would still be flat, and you and I would not be typing on
computers.

Perhaps psychic powers do exist. At the moment, there is no evidence
that they do not; but likewise, there is no evidence that they do. For
simplicity's sake, scientists ignore its possibility until they come to
something that they can either measure or statistically validate. That's
why scientists ignore ghosts. It doesn't have to be "in a lab"; stars,
global warming and neutrinos don't fit in a lab, yet that doesn't stop
scientists from measuring, statistically analysing, hypothesising, and
experimenting about them.

As you can see, you should welcome the scientific method, as it would
validate your conclusions if correct.

If you can give us something that can be measured, statistically
measured, and experimented on (in a repeatable way), then we could
consider this further.

For example: You said, "As it now stands, I *consistently* get two out
of every three lottery numbers-- night after night after night-- for the
lasst twenty-two days; something that would be statistically impossible
if psi wasn't involved."

If you really can predict these, then -- wow! -- do so. Email us
/before/ each lottery with your guesses. If you reach a statistical
measure of at least 95%, this will be worthy of scientific
investigation. If you reach at least 99%, you will have many people
interested. 99.9% will get you in a lab ;-) !

Paddy


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> A well developed rational function doesn't preclude delusory
beliefs!
> In fact 'scientists' can be screwed up by allowing their intuition
to
> atrophy and start applying logic where it isnt effective. Most great
> scientists seem to value art and intuiton as much as maths and logic
> . Bad scientists excessive faith in bad science cases much grief.
>
> > There is a
> > considrable body of proof: yet those who say there isn't is either
> > lying to themselves, or are ignorant of the facts
> Or are merely sceptical because there is not sufficient widely
accepted proof.

Keith, isn't that like saying I won't believe in hypnosis unless
everyone who's hypnotized can slow their hearts down to one beat per
hour?

That's basically what you've said about ESP and related phenomena. It
has always been related to emotions and biological processes that few
can control. Can you produce a theta state at will and walk around in
it? That's essentially what you-- and others want: do a trick and
prove to us psi exists-- and while you're at it, keep doing it until
we are satisfied that you aren't faking. Nina Kulagina, a
telekineticist, lost as much as five pounds of her body weight doing
TK experiments for Soviet scientists. The strain ultimately killed
her. Is that proof enough? For some, there'll never be enough proof.

You say you meditate? Suppose I don't believe in the benefits of
meditation until everyone who meditates proves that they can raise
the temperature of their right hand, five degrees above the norm. Is
that rational? No, but that's the same standard that's being applied
here.

However, folks like Erickson and others in your own field have done
numerous fascinating experiments to prove that such abilities do
exist, and that hypnosis can bring them out. Not that everyone wants
to be hypnotized to prove a point.

As for con men, let's not forget that many a scientist has also ben
con men. Look at cold fusion, at the Piltdown Man, and many other
scientific hoaxes. Scientists want the lay person to accept the idea
that there are invissible masssless particles that zip through us all
the time from space; particles we can't see, taste, feel or detect by
film-- yet psi is too far out? What's wrong with that picture?  :-)

Ron

This is an excerpt from  the forthcoming collection of James Braid's
writings, The Discovery of Hypnosis,  to be published in 2009 by the National
Council
for Hypnotherapy (NCH).   This excerpt was recently published as an article in
the journal of the National  Council for Hypnotherapy.
“On  Braid’s Hanover Square Talks”:
Report & Letter in The Medical Times  (1842)

Excerpt from The Discovery of  Hypnosis, Copyright © Donald Robertson, 2008
Editor’s  Preface (D. Robertson)
This  is possibly Braid’s very earliest publication on hypnotism; his letter
was dated  March 7th 1842 and published in the March 12th edition of  The
Medical Times.  In it he does not use the term  “hypnotism”, though
elsewhere he
suggests it was already in use by him at his  lectures.  The anonymous report
which precedes his letter mentions his use of the expression
“neuro-hypnology”
,  albeit spelt incorrectly.
Indeed,  this is one of Braid’s most interesting letters, providing a neat
summary of his  early theory and practice.  It  illustrates how, from the
outset, Braid’s work was independently reported, and  publicly examined and
endorsed
by a wide variety of observers, including some of  the most distinguished
scientists and physicians of his day.  In his first booklet on the subject,
published shortly after this letter, a frustrated Braid reminds his critics of
the sincere and persistent efforts which he made in order to substantiate his
views,
Had I not, moreover, stated  the fact that impressed with the importance of
the subject, I had, at great  personal inconvenience as well as pecuniary
sacrifice, gone to London, that my  views might be subjected “to a rigid
examination
” of the most learned men in our  profession, to propound to them the laws by
which I consider it to act, and  above all, to prove to them “the uniformity
of its action” and its practical  applicability and value as a curative
agency, by [my] mode of operating.  (Satanic Agency, etc., 1852)
This  journalist’s report and Braid’s subjoined letter, show the extent to
which, with  the limited means available to him, Braid attempted to develop his
theory in a  credible manner.  In Neurypnology (1843), Braid comments on  the
role of Dr. Herbert Mayo, one of the most distinguished medical scientists
of the period, at the meeting,
I am fully borne out by the  opinion of that eminent physiologist, Mr.
Herbert Mayo, in my view of the  subject, that my plan is ‘the best, the
shortest,
and surest for getting the  sleep,’ and throwing the nervous system, by
artificial contrivance, into a new  condition, which may be rendered available
in the
healing art.  At a private conversazione, which I gave  to the profession in
London on the 1st of March, 1842, he examined  and tested my patients most
carefully, submitted himself to be operated on by me  both publicly and
privately, and was so searching and inquisitive in his  investigations as to
call forth
the animadversions of a medical gentleman  present, who thought he was not
giving me fair play; but which he has assured me  proceeded from an anxious
desire to know the truth, not being biased by having  any peculiar views of his
own to bring forward; and because he considered the  subject most important,
both in a speculative and practical point of view.
In  his Electro-Biological Phenomena  (1851) Braid describes a successful
public demonstration delivered by him in  Manchester, adding,
I was equally successful in  operating upon a number of strangers together at
a private conversazione, given  to the profession in London, in March 1842,
sixteen out  of eighteen having passed into the sleep, simply by maintaining a
steady fixed  stare and fixed act of attention, whilst gazing at  root of a
chandelier.  Most of these  had never been so tried before.  I  never touched
any one of them until their eyelids closed.  Mr Herbert Mayo, the eminent
physiologist and surgeon, tested them, and ran a needle from the back to the 
palm
of the hand of one patient without his (the patient) evincing the slightest
consciousness of pain, or remembrance of it after awaking.
Dr. Mayo subsequently published  his own favourable account entitled ‘On Mr.
Braid’s experiments’, in the next  volume of the Medical Times for  1852.


[Report by Anonymous  Correspondent]
Mr.  Braid delivered two very excellent lectures on this subject last week,
one on  Tuesday the 1st of March, at the Hanover Square Rooms, the other, the
following day, at the London Tavern.
The lecturer commenced by giving his audience a detailed explanation of  the
theory and phenomena of animal magnetism, and entered fully into the  subject,
illustrating the paper by physiological facts, and several interesting
anecdotes.  He prefers the term “neuohypnology [sic., an obvious typographical
mistake],  or the rationale of nervous sleep,” to that of animal magnetism,
and
thinks that  that term is more proper, inasmuch as the effect is produced
through the medium  of the nervous system.  Several  experiments performed after
the
lecture.
The first was a young woman, whom Mr. Braid directed to look at her own
finger; in two minutes the face became flushed, the woman sighed, and the eyes
closed.  She was then requested to sit down, which  she did; her arms were
raised and also her legs; ammonia was placed under her  nose, the galvanic
battery
applied, pins stuck in the forehead and legs, and  without the woman evincing
the slightest pain.  The second experiment was upon two deaf brothers, one of
them was  magnetised by looking upwards, and in three minutes the effect was
produced.  Mr. Braid extended both  arms, which remained so for some time; he
then clapped his hands, and the boy  instantly became de-mesmerised.  The
experimenter stated that the hearing was increased twelvefold during the time
the patient was under the influence of the magnetising process.  The elder
brother was then subjected to  the same process, and became magnetised in about
three or four minutes; a percussion cap was fired at his ear when  in this
state,
but no effect supervened.  It is a singular thing that [presumably  at a
different stage in the lecture] the pulse in this boy increased from 84 to
140[bpm], and Mr. Braid remarked that such was generally the case.  [Braid
repeatedly makes this observation  in his writings, which seems to be verified
by the
reporter.  The induction of rigid catalepsy seems  to roughly double the pulse,
raising it to a level more typical during intense  aerobic exercise.]
The third experiment was upon his own footman [perhaps the young  “man-servant
” discussed in Neurypnology].  In this case he bandaged the man’s eyes  and
in three minutes he was asleep; he was subjected to nearly the same
experiments as the preceding.  Mr.  Braid then recovered him and directed the
man to
turn his eyes to the side; in a  few minutes the eyes closed, and the most
curious effect was produced; the man  began gradually to turn round, a
circumstance
by no means uncommon with those  who turn the eyes to the side (so the
lecturer informed us).  [This phenomenon might be compared to  Braid’s later
observations on “muscular suggestion.”]
The fourth experiment was upon a young lady, whom Mr. Duncan [who had
previously conducted lectures introducing Braid’s work to the London audience 
prior
to his arrival] had been in the habit of experimenting on.  This was a very
interesting case; after  being magnetised, several objects were placed before
her eyes (which were  closed), and she distinctly names each article in
succession [an illusory feat,  later attributed by Braid to the ability to see
through eyelids which are not  properly closed]; she then walked about the
platform,
and knelt and arose at the  request of the lecturer.
The last and concluding experiment was upon a young woman, who after  going
through nearly the same operations, finished by singing “off, off, says the
stranger,” and it  really seemed as if she were about to go off.


[Braid’s Letter to the  Editor]
To  the Editor of the Medical Times,
Sir,
I  feel obliged by the kind note you have sent me stating your intention of
honouring me by a report of my lecture.  I much regret you could not attend
the conversazioni, but I shall furnish you  with a brief account of what took
place on that occasion.  When I had briefly explained to those  present my
theoretical views, and the ground on which I had come to such  conclusions, I
expressed my intention to exhibit the phenomena on some of the  subjects I had
brought with me; some stranger proposed that it might be still  more
satisfactory
and convincing to all present, were I to operate on a  stranger, to which I
readily assented, provided any one present was willing to  become the subject of
experiment.  It was then announced that a person born deaf and dumb was
present, and  had come with the express desire to be operated on, and would now
come forward  if I chose to begin with him.  I  assented, and the patient came
forward accordingly.  He was totally deaf, was never known to  have heard sound
at any time in his life, and was 32 years of age.  In about eight minutes, I
evinced to all  present the most incontestable proof of hearing being restored.
  I then operated on another stranger  successfully, and on a third, who was
one of my subjects; the varied phenomena  intended, and expressed as meant to
be exhibited by said patient, were all  demonstrated, to the satisfaction of
all present.  The next operated on was Herbert Mayo,  Esq., so well known to the
profession; afterwards my other subjects were  operated on, exhibiting these
varied phenomena, both mental and corporeal.  As the last experiment of the
evening,  eighteen were subject to their operation at once, and in ten minutes
16 of the  number [89%] were all in a state of somnolency, and some in the
cataleptiform  state, with insensibility to pain, as tested both by myself and
Mr.
Mayo [who  seems to have shoved a pin straight through his hand].  The other
two did not comply with my  injunctions.  For the correctness of  this
statement, I beg to refer you to Dr. [Archibald] Billing [a physician and 
medical
author] and Mr. Herbert Mayo, who tested the patients, and neither of  whom I
had had the honour of knowing till that evening.  [In Hypnotic Therapeutics,
1853, Braid adds,  that of this group, ‘twelve of whom had never been tried
before
’, the sixteen  responsive subjects ‘went into the condition at same time,
by gazing fixedly and  abstractedly on the root of a chandelier.’]  I should
feel obliged by your recording the fact now stated, in addition  to what your
reporter might see or hear at the public lecture.  In short, the whole of my
experiments go to  prove, that there is a law of the animal economy by which a
continued fixation  of the visual organ, and a constrained attention of the mind
to one subject,  which is not of itself of an exciting nature; a state of
somnolency is induced,  with a peculiar mobility of the whole system, which may
be directed so as to  exhibit the whole or greater part of the mesmeric
phenomena.
The remarks of your talented correspondent, Mr. Barrallier, relative to  Mr.
Catlow’s experiments, are quite in accordance with my own views.  I had made
experiments to prove this,  and had come to the same conclusion as Mr.
Barrallier before I was aware of his  experiments, and have confirmed them many
times
since on different  subjects.  Mr. C.’s cases on the  sense of hearing, touch,
taste, smelling, and muscular motion, were nothing  beyond natural sleep, at
any rate totally different from mesmeric sleep, unless in those cases where
the patients had  been repeatedly operated on in my way, or through the eye.
After a certain time, and frequency of  being operated on in this way, the brain
has an impressibility stamped on it  which renders the patient subject to be
acted on entirely through the imagination, and this is the grand  source of
the follies which have misled Mr. C. and the animal magnetisers.  I feel most
confident of this, and shall  feel obliged by your publishing this letter to
record what I believe to be the  fact.
On my return home, I delivered a lecture at Birmingham on Thursday  evening,
3rd inst.  [3rd March 1842], when I exhibited a series of experiments which
were  quite conclusive on the subject.  I  am to deliver another lecture in
Manchester next Saturday evening, when I shall  exhibit the same, and many more,
illustrative of the imagined transposition of the senses [i.e., seeing with the
stomach, and other  supposed paranormal abilities called the “higher phenomena
” of Mesmerism], and  the magnetic power of attraction, a report of which
shall be sent to some of our  papers, which I shall correct if any mistakes
should appear before I send  it.
I beg leave further to state, that as I have operated successfully on the
blind, it is evident it is not the optic nerve so much as the ganglionic or
sympathetic systems and motor nerves of the eye, and state of the mind, which
influence the system in this extraordinary manner.
I  have the honour to be, Sir, your much obliged and obedient servant,
James  Braid.
3,  St. Peter’s Square, March 7th 1842
PS.  I may add, that last night I was called  to a lady suffering the most
agonizing Tic Douloroux.  In five minutes by my mode of inducing  refreshing
sleep, I succeeded in putting this patient into comfortable sleep,  from which
she did not awake till Sunday in the morning, being five and a half  hours, and
was then quite easy.  By  what other agency, I now ask, could such an effort
have been induced.

Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
College Principal & Executive  Director

Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist (NCH)
Registered  Psychotherapist (UKCP)
Member of the European Register of Psychotherapists  (ERP)
Fellow of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health  (RSPH)


The UK College of  Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy Ltd.
_www.UKhypnosis.com_ (http://www.ukhypnosis.com/)

Freephone (UK)  0800 195 9809
Fax: 01403 265 015
International +44(0)1403248266
UKCHH,  Suite 127, 17 Piries Place, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1BF

Hypno-CBTÂź is  the registered trademark of The UK College of Hypnosis &
Hypnotherapy  Ltd.
Registered in England as Company No. 05499462, UK Register of Learning
Providers No.10008042
VAT Registration 920 1916 52

UKCHH Ltd.  Disclaimer, Terms, & Copyright
Copyright (c) UKCHH Ltd., unless  otherwise stated. This email is
confidential and intended solely for the use of  the addressee. If you are not
the
intended recipient then the disclosure,  copying or distribution to others of
any
part or whole of this message is  strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
imediately and delete the  email.

This message has been scanned for viruses before sending. UKCHH  Ltd. accepts
no responsibility for infection and recommends you scan both email  and
contents.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "BlackMonk"
<blackmonk@...> wrote:
> Why is this person allowed to continue posting things like this? I
was under the impression that personal attacks weren't allowed on this
list.

I wasn't sure whether, as moderator, to allow your own post through as
it seems to potentially personalise and aggravate things further.
However, I've allowed it, as an opportunity to remind everyone on the
forum to please take note of the ground rules which do require that you
keep your postings on the topic of hypnotism, and that means not
straying to far into discussion of the paranormal, etc., and that you
treat other people with respect and avoid anything that might be
perceived as personal criticism.  At the same time, if you post a
comment you should be prepared to face other people's disagreement and
take criticism of your comments in the spirit of debate.

Donald Robertson
Moderator

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Hubbard" <hubbard_ron@...>
To: <hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 10:13 PM
Subject: [UKhypno] Re: Hypnotism or Mesmerism


> --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, Tom <blackmonk@...>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> > To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com> From:
> hubbard_ron@...> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:39:27 +0000> Subject:
> [UKhypno] Re: Hypnotism or Mesmerism> > > It's not just the
> scientific community, but they lead the way due to > a flawed way of
> looking at things: to them, if a thing can't be > repeated in a lab
> and written up in a journal, therefore it doesn't > exist. To any
> other rational person, that's horse manure: a thing can > or cannot
> exist becaause it does irrespective of whether any > scientist
> believes in it.>
>>
>> "Can't be repeated in a lab" and "scientists don't believe in it"
> are two different things.
>>
>> Suppose I told you that, for instance, an object doesn't exist if
> it has no physical substance and you said that objects can exist
> whether I believe in them or not. That's true, but those objects that
> exist without my belief still have physical substance.
>
> I'm glad I took debate classes or I would get drowned in that morass
> of non sequitors. It's amazing how far people will go to not
> acknowledge something that frightens them or shakes their belief
> system.
>

Why is this person allowed to continue posting things like this? I was under
the impression that personal attacks weren't allowed on this list.

Oh, here it is. "Please keep your postings short, on the topic of hypnosis,
respectful and polite."

I find Ron Hubbard's posting to be neither respectful nor polite.
"Insulting" and "intolerant" are words that come to mind more readily. A
person who can't accept that someone who disagrees with him has legtimate
reasons for doing so, preferring to ascribe that person's disagreement as
not being willing to "acknowledge something that frightens them or shakes
their belief
system" is not a person who can be engaged in civil discussion in my
opinion.

Hi Ron,

2008/12/17 Ron Hubbard <hubbard_ron@...>:
> 1) Yes, I agree with you: the Oriental folks do understand so much
> about the body and brain-- especially compared to "modern medicine."
Some aspects of it yes. But their knowledge is obscured by a lot of
superstitious/religious stuff. Which may or may not be true - but it
puts off many westerners as it put me off for too long.

> They also know all about psi abilities: they call them Joriki. But
> they consider these abilities a distraction on the way to enlightenment.
This is indeed a common belief in the spiritual path world. Personally
I doubt it and believe it is the ego playing tricks on people. Maybe
one day I will reach a certian stage and experience it myself and wil
change my belief.

> ... then what's needed is control
Yes - to a degree where an acceptable standard of experimental proof
can be given.

> 2) Every culture (except this, a young one) has been aware that psi
> abilities exist although the names have varied. All cultures know
> of "second sight" and the gift of prophecy. "shamans," medicine men,
> prophets-- whatever you want to call-- all have utilized those gifts
> for the benefit of their people; such people were also highly valued
> by their people. Only in this ass-backward culture are psychic folks
> ignored, even shunned.
There have been great healers and great quacks and con-men forever and
always will be. Which is which may be hard to decide. We have
scientific proof of some things, anecdotal backing of others and
patently stupid blind faith in many things. "shamanism" can have many
valid techniques (as had the masons, alchemists, warrior schools,
religious sects etc)  I know this from my yoga/meditation experiences.
A knight of the temple did an all night vigil in knights pose as part
of initiation. To me this is a yogic practise (mainly strech the left
torso and thigh) to come to terms with horror and war - to avoid Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder and to maintain control in the stress of
combat. Soldiers should do it today. I would'nt expect anyone except
someone who has done it or similar to believe this! Organised religion
purges effective practice leaving ineffective traces. So Moslem bowing
and Christain singing/chanting and standing and sitting in unison has
become ineffective. Our culture is great - it just has some big gaps -
Islam and Christianity made these gaps bigger!  Our science has purged
our culture of many superstitious beliefs, But most eople are by
nature superstitious - so many beliefs carry on despite evidence. Also
many people deny 'experienatial learning' as they 'mistake it' for
superstition.

>  3. The scientific sytem is highly flawed and always has been. To put
> faith into is-- As Mr. Spock would say-- illogical.
Good science is helpful and excellent. By definition it is the
appliance of logic to observation. The standard required to accept a
truth is so high that psi supporters are yet to reach that standard of
proof. So it is not scientific Of course science hasnt proved it
doesnt exist. We seem to have subtle froms of 'communication' not
known in current science - or known inprinciple but not in practise.
Yogis and shaman utilised our mirror neurons for thousands of years -
scientists discovered them in the 1990's.
The flaw is failure to realise that the field of internal exploration
('experiential learning') yields positive helpful techniques. The
ego/self in resisting change helps scientists dismiss the whole field
as unscientific, invalid even non-existent. It makes them think that
explanatory science is the only source of helpful knowledge.  The
blind faith in un-scientific explanations of believers in these things
puts scientists off too.


>  IF any psis could
> walk into a lab and do tricks for several hours, every day for weeks,
> the scientific community would be forced to acknowledge psi
> abilities. But let's get real here: psi abilities are a
> biological/psycological process, that for the most part can't be
> flipped on like a transistor radio. Only to the most stupid of
> scientists would insist on continued "proof" while denying the
> obvious and the written reports that span ages.
Wrong - exceptional claims require exceptional proof. It means that
people who have never experience 'psi' can validly believe it doesnt
exist. If one day I experience it I may change my view - but I may be
deluding myself as many people have done aout many things.

> That's not only stupidty, it's willful ignorance.
It is SCIENCE! Repeatable experimental validation (& prefereably a
feasible explanation) makes something scientifically true. There are
many triths outside science - they just arent scientific truths.  Some
of them will be  scientific truth one day and some will be disproven -
many will remian in limbo land.

> However, as I have said elsewhere, not all scientists have their
> heads of their asses when it coes to psi.
A well developed rational function doesn't preclude delusory beliefs!
In fact 'scientists' can be screwed up by allowing their intuition to
atrophy and start applying logic where it isnt effective. Most great
scientists seem to value art and intuiton as much as maths and logic
. Bad scientists excessive faith in bad science cases much grief.

> There is a
> considrable body of proof: yet those who say there isn't is either
> lying to themselves, or are ignorant of the facts
Or are merely sceptical because there is not sufficient widely accepted proof.

> However, if you
> should ever go the small grocery store on the edge of the Washington-
> Oregon border, you'll find my picture on the Winners Wall as I have
> won over $3,000 playing the lottery-- but losing very little. I used
> to win 1 out *every* 5 times I played before I got sick. Think about
> that. How many people win the lottery even once?
How do I refute this? Did you get lucky - did you invest more in
tickets than you realised? Did you have psi ability that you have now
lost? Are you lying? I just dont know.


> As it now stands, I *consistently* get two out of every three lottery
> numbers-- night after night after night-- for the lasst twenty-two
> days; something that would be statistically impossible if psi wasn't
> involved.
Plese give a statistical analysis. Are you saying for a random 3 digit
number you can say 3 digits and 2 will match those in the number.
Whats the odds on this? I have forgotten how to calculate that.


> Now, as the Bible says, there are none so blind as those who refuse
> to see. Right? ;-)
And none so wise (and free of tension) as those that don't have to believe.

Good luck,
Keith

Hi all,

2008/12/17 Donald Robertson <HypnoSynthesisUK@...>:
> "Subconscious" and "unconsious" are traditionally used to mean
> more or less the same thing, especially in hypnotherapy.
Thank goodness for that!

> There are as many "levels"
> of consciousness as people choose to define it in terms of, aren't
> there?
And wildly varying interpretations of each state too. If I try to
analyse it to any depth it gets odder and odder!  'Experiential
learning' is the study of our inner workings and it turns into a
'spiritual' path for most people. I belong to the minority 'sect' of
secular/agnostic/yogi/buddhists.  But deep experience defies
scienctific explorartion - at the moment at least. I am hoping modern
science can strip away a lot of the fanciful interpretations that
attach themselves to these things - and can support them with
empirical proof of their beneficial effects.

We don't have subconcious thoughts if we define thought as only being
thought if it comes to concious awareness. But lots is going on below
concious awareness - most of what controls us in fact.
We seem to operate using a layered principle given to us by evolution.
Each layer influences those around it. The highest level layer 'makes'
conciousness - 'feeling' (all sentient beings) and logic (a small part
of humans processing!).
If I analyse what thought is I get the standard buddhist anwser to
everything - its empty! There is a continuum between subconcious
reflex and concious acting. They are electrical-chemical-mechanical
(possibly magnetic) processes operating at different levels. Thinking
is in that area of these layers where we apply our conciousness - or
(in most people) that unthinkingly dominates our conciousness.
I think the buddhist statement 'No sense in using thinking to solve a
problem that doesnt exist in thought' is saying that buddhism works at
the layers below thinking - on the processes that under-pin it. All
the mind/body techniques do - and when effective they have a profound
indirect effect on our subconcious & conciousness.
Yogis bring concious awareness to processes that were subconcious and
even go beyond that and get concious control of them.  The border
between concious and subconcious is moveable.  In our stressing
environment a normal persons conciousness is over focused on external
sensory processing and future planning and analysing the past.  Many
subconcious processes are 'weighted' to serve conciousness so our
internal postural/mechanical and emotional management functions
'wither' and lose effectiveness. To make these processes more
effective we must take awareness away from sensory processing and
past/future thinking ie. meditate.  This is why I believe a measure of
success in mind/body methods is shown by posture - if postural
collapse is reversed it is working at a deep level that improves our
shape and our emotions.  Another rough measure is eye contact - fear
of this means there is a much 'false' fear still in the system.

These days I view many thoughts and emotions as just being served up
from subconcious processing - they are artifacts of my processing -
they arent such a big part of my 'self'. Many are irrelevant ,
spurious, misleading, negative, delusory. The subconcious is full of
layers of repressed fears and trauma - influencing my actions and
attitudes. This fear can be 'felt' when I turn my focus to some part
of my body - it comes to conciousness. This process allows the process
that releases the fear/trauma to do its job.  This processing is
distant from our logic and verbal processing - thats why
psycho-analysis has little effect on it.

I am curious to know if people who do lots of self-hypnosis experience
this sort of thing. When conciousness is directed to awkward areas
part of the subconcious tries to deflect it - using subtle and
powerfully means.  It seems to me an untrained person doing
self-hypnosis will be easily deflected from this sort of deep
exploration.
  'Tantric' and many yoga type practises (that on the surface seem
really bizarre) are designed to help you get past this resistance.

Keith.

Pardon my bad typing; it's damn cold here! The temperature has
dropped down to 20 F and my office is freezing. Oy!

Ron


--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "Ron Hubbard"
<hubbard_ron@...> wrote:
>
> Wow, what a lot of stuff you have written, Keith! But I have a
crappy
> old computer that crashes at the worst times, so I'll only address
> one ot rwo points.
>
> 1) Yes, I agree with you: the Oriental folks do understand so much
> about the body and brain-- especially compared to "modern medicine."
>
> They also know all about psi abilities: they call them Joriki. But
> they consider these abilities a distraction on the way to
> enlightenment. And maybe they are. But if you are one of the 12 to
15
> per cent (maybe more these days) of the world's population who has
> these talents, then what's needed is control-- ya can't say I'm
going
> to get rid of them--that would be like cuttting off one's left arm
or
> plucking out an eye.
>
> 2) Every culture (except this, a young one) has been aware that psi
> abilities exist although the names have varied. All cultures know
> of "second sight" and the gift of prophecy. "shamans," medicine
men,
> prophets-- whatever you want to call-- all have utilized those
gifts
> for the benefit of their people; such people were also highly
valued
> by their people. Only in this ass-backward culture are psychic
folks
> ignored, even shunned.
>
> 3. The scientific sytem is highly flawed and always has been. To
put
> faith into is-- As Mr. Spock would say-- illogical. IF any psis
could
> walk into a lab and do tricks for several hours, every day for
weeks,
> the scientific community would be forced to acknowledge psi
> abilities. But let's get real here: psi abilities are a
> biological/psycological process, that for the most part can't be
> flipped on like a transistor radio. Only to the most stupid of
> scientists would insist on continued "proof" while denying the
> obvious and the written reports that span ages.
>
> That's not only stupidty, it's willful ignorance.
>
> However, as I have said elsewhere, not all scientists have their
> heads of their asses when it coes to psi. Most of the military and
> intelligence agencies around the world have psi programs, and many
> scientists have had their own psychic experiences as well. There is
a
> considrable body of proof: yet those who say there isn't is either
> lying to themselves, or are ignorant of the facts and should just
the
> situation for themselves rather than toeing the line as so many
> scientists do.
>
>
> And lastly, 4) I have been precognitive ever since I was six and
the
> list of incidents would be way too long to list here. However, if
you
> should ever go the small grocery store on the edge of the
Washington-
> Oregon border, you'll find my picture on the Winners Wall as I have
> won over $3,000 playing the lottery-- but losing very little. I
used
> to win 1 out *every* 5 times I played before I got sick. Think
about
> that. How many people win the lottery even once?
>
> As it now stands, I *consistently* get two out of every three
lottery
> numbers-- night after night after night-- for the lasst twenty-two
> days; something that would be statistically impossible if psi
wasn't
> involved.
>
> The problem isthat I keep missing that third number, over and over
> again. My therapist thinks it may have to do with the way data is
> flowing through my brain-- corrupted by the fibro. We were working
on
> it before our session was rather rudely interrupted by outside
> agencies.
>
> Now, as the Bible says, there are none so blind as those who refuse
> to see. Right?  ;-)
>
> Ron
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Bacon"
> <KeithBacon7@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ron,
> > 2008/12/14 Ron Hubbard <hubbard_ron@>:
> > > ... the mechanisms of what's
> > > involved in hypnosis hadn't been even remotely understood for a
> very
> > > long time, and even now, I don't know how many
> > > hypnotists/hypnotherapists really understand what goes on in
the
> brain
> > > when hypnosis is brought into play.
> > .....
> > > There's a schism: the hypnotists don't care about the
> physiological
> > > aspects nor do the neurologists care about what happens with
> hypnosis-
> >
> > I actually think the ancient yogi/buddhists probably understand
this
> > stuff better that anyone. If you are very  internally sensitive
you
> > can learn a lot about how we work - psychologically and physically
> > (actually psycho-physically as at a certain depth there is no
> > seperation (but maybe they seperate again at a greater depth..).
> > A neurologist is different from a yogi in the same way that a
> > mathematician who has equations explaining harmonics is different
> from
> > a conductor who makes an orchestra great. One job is pure science
> the
> > other is intuition and 'empirical science'.  There is a continuum
> > between these poles and hypnotherapy is in the middle of it.
> >
> > > Then you add in the psi aspects and most people tune out.
> > As I do!
> >
> > >  But just because you don't want to believe in something, that
> does not
> > > make reality untrue.
> > Hmmmmm! Just because you experience something or other people
> > experience it and tell you about it doesn't make it true either!
It
> > may feel like truth but many of our feelings are not reliable.
> >
> > >  There *are* people who have demonstrated telekinesis
> > > while-- and only while-- under hypnosis.
> > OK where's the proof? Exceptional proof required for such
> exceptional
> > claims please.  Currently it seems to me if such things exist
they
> are
> > so weak or useless that they can't be simply proved.
> >
> > > there are many
> > > mainstream scientists who don't tow the line and believe in psi
> > > abilities whether they can be proven in a lab or not.
> >
> > I am very interested in this business of belief and strange
things -
> > as I have strange belifs myself. My current conclusions are:-
> > 1 - Only a small percentage of humans are able to remove or
change a
> > belief in the face of evidence.
> >
> > 2 - Most people need to have explanations of things which can't be
> > understood by them. So there is much superstitious belief about.
So
> > many of these beliefs have been rolled back by modern science
that I
> > regard it as highly likely many current common beliefs will be
> > delusory. The are many written claims 'proving' things that fall
> apart
> > under scutiny - the UFO & psi press is like this. If there are
> genuine
> > events they are rare and lost in the 'noise' of nonsense.
> >
> > 3 - I have personal experience of things which most people think
are
> > scientifically impossible. Their beliefs are not scientific -
they
> are
> > 'faith based' - they have an excessive faith that science can
> explain
> > everything eventually. My experiences are personal and I cant
prove
> > their validity to sceptics and people who will not try to gain the
> > same experiences I have had.
> >
> > 4 - Most people that have had the same 'mystic' (horrible word but
> > romantic!) experiences interpret them very differently than me -
so
> > there may be doubt that we have actually have shared the
experience.
> >
> > 5 - As there is so little external support for my interpretation
of
> my
> > experiences I must doubt them.
> >
> > Q - So what is certain then?
> > A - Not much that matters!
> >
> > Q - Is that a problem?
> > A - No it is a huge benefit if you can 'realise' this. The urge to
> > 'understand' what can't be understood and the urge to 'construct a
> > reality' that is more exciting and 'firm' than the mundaneness of
> the
> > 'shallow reality' that forms naturally in the mind of a person
> subject
> > to the stresses of 'civilised' life is a big problem. This problem
> > manifests as an over-excited nervous system, huge amounts of
> > unreleased muscle tension & generalised impairment of all the
bodies
> > systems - resulting in all sorts of health problems.
> >
> > So here's a belief for you Ron - I believe if you addressed the
> above
> > issues your Fibromyalgia would go away! And the strength of your
> > beliefs would wane as you lost muscle tension in the torso.
> > What a strange belief I have! And no evidence to back it up. So I
> > would not expect you to believe the same.
> >
> > I also believe a hypnotherapist that takes money off you to
> cultivate
> > your psi abilities should offer you a full refund if you dont get
a
> > clear demonstrable result from it. Many of my yogi colleagues
claim
> > 'psi' experiences but I can't see what benefit they get except a
> sense
> > of being part of something special - which I take as a sign their
> ego
> > plays a bigger part in their workings than they think! Either
that
> or
> > they are further down the path than me - I don't know.
> >
> > Good luck,
> > Keith.
> > PS If you win the lottery shortly I may be in for some serious
> doubting....
> > PPS I believe there are subtle ways we influence each others
systems
> > which are well beyond current science. 'Mirror' neurons triggered
> > visually are known to science but I think all our known senses
> > probably participate in 'mirroring'. And our elecro-magnetic
fields
> > might and maybe there is even more......  This influencing
anothers
> > system thru mirroring gets interpreted as 'energy' chanelling as
it
> > was by the mesmerists.
> >
> > PPPPPPPPS But I still don't believe in 'meaningful' long range
> > instantaneous communication!
> >
>

--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, Tom <blackmonk@...>
wrote:
>
>
> > To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com> From:
hubbard_ron@...> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:39:27 +0000> Subject:
[UKhypno] Re: Hypnotism or Mesmerism> > > It's not just the
scientific community, but they lead the way due to > a flawed way of
looking at things: to them, if a thing can't be > repeated in a lab
and written up in a journal, therefore it doesn't > exist. To any
other rational person, that's horse manure: a thing can > or cannot
exist becaause it does irrespective of whether any > scientist
believes in it.>
>
> "Can't be repeated in a lab" and "scientists don't believe in it"
are two different things.
>
> Suppose I told you that, for instance, an object doesn't exist if
it has no physical substance and you said that objects can exist
whether I believe in them or not. That's true, but those objects that
exist without my belief still have physical substance.

I'm glad I took debate classes or I would get drowned in that morass
of non sequitors. It's amazing how far people will go to not
acknowledge something that frightens them or shakes their belief
system.



> > > That said, I'm rather fortunate that I live in Oregon where so
many > people are open to psi: doctors, nurses, psychologists, and
most > people on the streets.
>
> A doctor in Oregon recently killed someone I was very close to
through incompetence. I don't consider "doctors in Oregon believe in
it" to be a high reccomendation.

Yeah... doctors kill people through incompetence *everywhere,* but I
wasn't making any "recommendations" but stating a simple fact: that
folks-- and particularly, those professionals who have traditionally
been known to reject all aspects of psi-- are more open-minded to the
subject here.

I can tell my doctor about something weired that might have happened
and not have to worry that they think I'm a lunatic; I can go to a
therapist-- any kind of therapist for just about any reason-- and
find myself discussing psi abilities and other related topics in a
rational way, with rational people who don't reject it out of hand
because such things aren't confirmed by the scientific elite. These
people think for themselves... something more people should do.

Ron

--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, Jo Foggin <jo@...>
wrote:
> Just a note to say that there are in fact 3 levels of
consciousness - 1. conscious 2. subconscious 3. unconscious.

To be fair, that's just your own definition of what those words
mean.  "Subconscious" and "unconsious" are traditionally used to mean
more or less the same thing, especially in hypnotherapy.

The reason for the difference was that Freud, writing in German,
popularised the term "unconscious" in opposition to his rival, Pierre
Janet, writing in French, who used the term "subconscious."  So they
largely come from competing psychological schools of thought.

These are also pretty arbitrary verbal distinctions.  It doesn't make
any more sense to say there are "in fact" three levels of
consciousness than to say that there are actually only three shades
of the colour red, and no more or less.  There are as many "levels"
of consciousness as people choose to define it in terms of, aren't
there?

However, none of this originally had anything whatsoever to do with
hypnotism.  It wasn't until the end of the 19th century that people
started to use these concepts to explain hypnosis.  Braid and
Bernheim got on perfectly without any of this, and Bernheim actually
attacks the concept of unconscious thought in his magnum opus on
hypnotherapy.  It's also totally alien to certain cognitive and
behavioural approaches to hypnotherapy, such as Sarbin's, which try
to avoid psychodynamic jargon.

Donald Robertson

Just a note to say that there are in fact 3 levels of consciousness - 1.
conscious 2. subconscious 3. unconscious.
To make things easier for clients we should only use the references conscious
and unconscious as the subconscious is a different level to the 2 we work with.
This is where you need to be able to explain, in detail if needs be, how
hypnosis should work. You have to do a lot of work explaining in order for
therapy to be successful - this is where I may differ from some. I believe that
hypnosis is a great tool but I also believe that you need more skills than
hypnosis by itself in order to offer a truly supported therapy.
I am a clinical counsellor who uses hypnosis very successfully, however until we
accept the fact that we do need more regulation in order to take our place
alongside other supported therapies we are going to struggle.
I have been lucky enough to persuade our local Health Authority to come to my
centre and see what is involved and how seriously I personally take it, although
I knew at the beginning that an o.k from N.I.C.E would be needed to gain real
support.
If you ignore the phsicology element of therapy you are in fact missing a great
deal.
Constantly bringing in elements such as physic abilities, past life regression
and the like means that we are constantly deflected from the real goal of making
hypnotherapy a true therapy in peoples eyes.
I offer a therapy that combines counselling, CBT, Hypnotherapy and my years of
experience  because I believe strongly, having seen the evidence, that these
things work and there is nothing whatsoever within the system that helps in the
long term - as a psychiatrist friend once told me "all we do is educated
guesswork". quite frankly that is simply not good enough as more and more people
are being prescribed medication because there is no alternative for our G.P's.
(okay, I could go on for pages but I won't as it can become a bit much!)
This should be recognised as a profession and not a hobby that anyone can dabble
in without a good all round knowledge of what they are dealing with.
I am sorry that this may sound a bit rough but I do have a temp of 101 at the
moment!
 
Best wishes
 
Joanna Foggin Dip.C.P.C  Dip.CHyp
GHR NCP GHSC
www.thebalancecentre.info


 SMILE - IT CONFUSES PEOPLE

--- On Wed, 17/12/08, Barry Cooper <barry.cooper1@...> wrote:

From: Barry Cooper <barry.cooper1@...>
Subject: RE: [UKhypno] Conscious/Subconscious
To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, 17 December, 2008, 6:36 PM






I use this model all the time and I've never noticed any signs of unease in
clients. I use the word unconscious, though.

Barry Cooper MNCH(Acc)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hypnosis-hypnothera py-UK@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:hypnosis-
> hypnotherapy- UK@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Duncan Gunn
> Sent: 17 December 2008 09:39
> To: hypnosis-hypnothera py-UK@yahoogroup s.com
> Subject: [UKhypno] Re:NCH Hypnotherapy Video

> The only thing that gripes me is that the subject keeps
> going on about conscious/subconsci ous. Now, I know there are many
> psycho/hypnotherapi sts out there who still adhere to this model and the
use
> of the word 'subconscious' can be used with clients effectively but I have
> also found that the use of the word creates quite a bit of unease with
> prospective clients or members of the public with whom I have spoken about
> hypnosis.

> Duncan Gunn MNCH(Lic) GHR(Reg)















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com> From: hubbard_ron@...>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 05:39:27 +0000> Subject: [UKhypno] Re: Hypnotism or
Mesmerism> > > It's not just the scientific community, but they lead the way due
to > a flawed way of looking at things: to them, if a thing can't be > repeated
in a lab and written up in a journal, therefore it doesn't > exist. To any other
rational person, that's horse manure: a thing can > or cannot exist becaause it
does irrespective of whether any > scientist believes in it.>

"Can't be repeated in a lab" and "scientists don't believe in it" are two
different things.

Suppose I told you that, for instance, an object doesn't exist if it has no
physical substance and you said that objects can exist whether I believe in them
or not. That's true, but those objects that exist without my belief still have
physical substance.
> > That said, I'm rather fortunate that I live in Oregon where so many > people
are open to psi: doctors, nurses, psychologists, and most > people on the
streets.

A doctor in Oregon recently killed someone I was very close to through
incompetence. I don't consider "doctors in Oregon believe in it" to be a high
reccomendation.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I use this model all the time and I've never noticed any signs of unease in
clients. I use the word unconscious, though.

Barry Cooper MNCH(Acc)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com [mailto:hypnosis-
> hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Duncan Gunn
> Sent: 17 December 2008 09:39
> To: hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [UKhypno] Re:NCH Hypnotherapy Video

> The only thing that gripes me is that the subject keeps
> going on about conscious/subconscious. Now, I know there are many
> psycho/hypnotherapists out there who still adhere to this model and the
use
> of the word 'subconscious' can be used with clients effectively but I have
> also found that the use of the word creates quite a bit of unease with
> prospective clients or members of the public with whom I have spoken about
> hypnosis.

> Duncan Gunn MNCH(Lic) GHR(Reg)

Wow, what a lot of stuff you have written, Keith! But I have a crappy
old computer that crashes at the worst times, so I'll only address
one ot rwo points.

1) Yes, I agree with you: the Oriental folks do understand so much
about the body and brain-- especially compared to "modern medicine."

They also know all about psi abilities: they call them Joriki. But
they consider these abilities a distraction on the way to
enlightenment. And maybe they are. But if you are one of the 12 to 15
per cent (maybe more these days) of the world's population who has
these talents, then what's needed is control-- ya can't say I'm going
to get rid of them--that would be like cuttting off one's left arm or
plucking out an eye.

2) Every culture (except this, a young one) has been aware that psi
abilities exist although the names have varied. All cultures know
of "second sight" and the gift of prophecy. "shamans," medicine men,
prophets-- whatever you want to call-- all have utilized those gifts
for the benefit of their people; such people were also highly valued
by their people. Only in this ass-backward culture are psychic folks
ignored, even shunned.

3. The scientific sytem is highly flawed and always has been. To put
faith into is-- As Mr. Spock would say-- illogical. IF any psis could
walk into a lab and do tricks for several hours, every day for weeks,
the scientific community would be forced to acknowledge psi
abilities. But let's get real here: psi abilities are a
biological/psycological process, that for the most part can't be
flipped on like a transistor radio. Only to the most stupid of
scientists would insist on continued "proof" while denying the
obvious and the written reports that span ages.

That's not only stupidty, it's willful ignorance.

However, as I have said elsewhere, not all scientists have their
heads of their asses when it coes to psi. Most of the military and
intelligence agencies around the world have psi programs, and many
scientists have had their own psychic experiences as well. There is a
considrable body of proof: yet those who say there isn't is either
lying to themselves, or are ignorant of the facts and should just the
situation for themselves rather than toeing the line as so many
scientists do.


And lastly, 4) I have been precognitive ever since I was six and the
list of incidents would be way too long to list here. However, if you
should ever go the small grocery store on the edge of the Washington-
Oregon border, you'll find my picture on the Winners Wall as I have
won over $3,000 playing the lottery-- but losing very little. I used
to win 1 out *every* 5 times I played before I got sick. Think about
that. How many people win the lottery even once?

As it now stands, I *consistently* get two out of every three lottery
numbers-- night after night after night-- for the lasst twenty-two
days; something that would be statistically impossible if psi wasn't
involved.

The problem isthat I keep missing that third number, over and over
again. My therapist thinks it may have to do with the way data is
flowing through my brain-- corrupted by the fibro. We were working on
it before our session was rather rudely interrupted by outside
agencies.

Now, as the Bible says, there are none so blind as those who refuse
to see. Right?  ;-)

Ron








--- In hypnosis-hypnotherapy-UK@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Bacon"
<KeithBacon7@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Ron,
> 2008/12/14 Ron Hubbard <hubbard_ron@...>:
> > ... the mechanisms of what's
> > involved in hypnosis hadn't been even remotely understood for a
very
> > long time, and even now, I don't know how many
> > hypnotists/hypnotherapists really understand what goes on in the
brain
> > when hypnosis is brought into play.
> .....
> > There's a schism: the hypnotists don't care about the
physiological
> > aspects nor do the neurologists care about what happens with
hypnosis-
>
> I actually think the ancient yogi/buddhists probably understand this
> stuff better that anyone. If you are very  internally sensitive you
> can learn a lot about how we work - psychologically and physically
> (actually psycho-physically as at a certain depth there is no
> seperation (but maybe they seperate again at a greater depth..).
> A neurologist is different from a yogi in the same way that a
> mathematician who has equations explaining harmonics is different
from
> a conductor who makes an orchestra great. One job is pure science
the
> other is intuition and 'empirical science'.  There is a continuum
> between these poles and hypnotherapy is in the middle of it.
>
> > Then you add in the psi aspects and most people tune out.
> As I do!
>
> >  But just because you don't want to believe in something, that
does not
> > make reality untrue.
> Hmmmmm! Just because you experience something or other people
> experience it and tell you about it doesn't make it true either! It
> may feel like truth but many of our feelings are not reliable.
>
> >  There *are* people who have demonstrated telekinesis
> > while-- and only while-- under hypnosis.
> OK where's the proof? Exceptional proof required for such
exceptional
> claims please.  Currently it seems to me if such things exist they
are
> so weak or useless that they can't be simply proved.
>
> > there are many
> > mainstream scientists who don't tow the line and believe in psi
> > abilities whether they can be proven in a lab or not.
>
> I am very interested in this business of belief and strange things -
> as I have strange belifs myself. My current conclusions are:-
> 1 - Only a small percentage of humans are able to remove or change a
> belief in the face of evidence.
>
> 2 - Most people need to have explanations of things which can't be
> understood by them. So there is much superstitious belief about. So
> many of these beliefs have been rolled back by modern science that I
> regard it as highly likely many current common beliefs will be
> delusory. The are many written claims 'proving' things that fall
apart
> under scutiny - the UFO & psi press is like this. If there are
genuine
> events they are rare and lost in the 'noise' of nonsense.
>
> 3 - I have personal experience of things which most people think are
> scientifically impossible. Their beliefs are not scientific - they
are
> 'faith based' - they have an excessive faith that science can
explain
> everything eventually. My experiences are personal and I cant prove
> their validity to sceptics and people who will not try to gain the
> same experiences I have had.
>
> 4 - Most people that have had the same 'mystic' (horrible word but
> romantic!) experiences interpret them very differently than me - so
> there may be doubt that we have actually have shared the experience.
>
> 5 - As there is so little external support for my interpretation of
my
> experiences I must doubt them.
>
> Q - So what is certain then?
> A - Not much that matters!
>
> Q - Is that a problem?
> A - No it is a huge benefit if you can 'realise' this. The urge to
> 'understand' what can't be understood and the urge to 'construct a
> reality' that is more exciting and 'firm' than the mundaneness of
the
> 'shallow reality' that forms naturally in the mind of a person
subject
> to the stresses of 'civilised' life is a big problem. This problem
> manifests as an over-excited nervous system, huge amounts of
> unreleased muscle tension & generalised impairment of all the bodies
> systems - resulting in all sorts of health problems.
>
> So here's a belief for you Ron - I believe if you addressed the
above
> issues your Fibromyalgia would go away! And the strength of your
> beliefs would wane as you lost muscle tension in the torso.
> What a strange belief I have! And no evidence to back it up. So I
> would not expect you to believe the same.
>
> I also believe a hypnotherapist that takes money off you to
cultivate
> your psi abilities should offer you a full refund if you dont get a
> clear demonstrable result from it. Many of my yogi colleagues claim
> 'psi' experiences but I can't see what benefit they get except a
sense
> of being part of something special - which I take as a sign their
ego
> plays a bigger part in their workings than they think! Either that
or
> they are further down the path than me - I don't know.
>
> Good luck,
> Keith.
> PS If you win the lottery shortly I may be in for some serious
doubting....
> PPS I believe there are subtle ways we influence each others systems
> which are well beyond current science. 'Mirror' neurons triggered
> visually are known to science but I think all our known senses
> probably participate in 'mirroring'. And our elecro-magnetic fields
> might and maybe there is even more......  This influencing anothers
> system thru mirroring gets interpreted as 'energy' chanelling as it
> was by the mesmerists.
>
> PPPPPPPPS But I still don't believe in 'meaningful' long range
> instantaneous communication!
>

Donald,



Thanks for posting the video.



I thought it was really pretty good and I will certainly be putting it up on
my practice web site with permission (the re-design of which is currently my
pet love/hate). The only thing that gripes me is that the subject keeps
going on about conscious/subconscious. Now, I know there are many
psycho/hypnotherapists out there who still adhere to this model and the use
of the word 'subconscious' can be used with clients effectively but I have
also found that the use of the word creates quite a bit of unease with
prospective clients or members of the public with whom I have spoken about
hypnosis. Referring to a previous post, it makes some people think that
hypnosis is somehow weird and to be feared. I have had several first-time
clients who have expressed to me their trepidation at being hypnotised
(usually brought about by taunting comments from their husbands/wives) and
have raised concerns about what will happen if I access their subconscious.
After explaining the CB model they have understood that there is no
hocus-pocus and the sessions proceeded with their anxieties resolved (well,
at least those anxieties concerning hypnosis).



Duncan Gunn MNCH(Lic) GHR(Reg)

Perfect Equilibrium : Cognitive Behavioural Hypnotherapy & Sports Mental
Toughness





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> From another thread Ron has been asking us to accept that certain
psi
> abilities under hypnosis have been tested. As a curious and
investigative
> bunch, I'm sure we would be interested to here where we can read
about the
> research  processes and results, Ron. Could you let us all know?

Duncan, I'm tempted to say thatt there is a rift between the
scientific community and the psi community-- and whether anyone knows
it or not-- there *is* a psi community. With over 720 million people
with some form
of wild talents, that doesn't go unnoticed. But often it does go
unaccepted.

It's not just the scientific community, but they lead the way due to
a flawed way of looking at things: to them, if a thing can't be
repeated in a lab and written up in a journal, therefore it doesn't
exist. To any other rational person, that's horse manure: a thing can
or cannot exist becaause it does irrespective of whether any
scientist believes in it.

Psi abilities do work, and that is the other side of the coin: that
fact scares a lot of people. Even if it's on some dark and primitive
level, such abilities scare a lot of people and they don't want to
know about, don't want to believe in them, and won't accept them.
Unfortunately, many scientists are in this group and hide their fears
behind the "scientific method."

That said, I'm rather fortunate that I live in Oregon where so many
people are open to psi: doctors, nurses, psychologists, and most
people on the streets. As example, some years ago I was in a
bookstore when a whole row of books suddenly-- and literally-- jumped
off of the shelf. A woman looked at, looked at me and smiled; she
said "somebody is trying to tell you something" and walked on as if
that was the most natural thing she ever saw.

Fortunately my hypnotherapist is also psi-gifted and open to new
ideas and concepts in both hypnosis and medicine. She helped me a lot
with my fibromyalgia. But now, it seems that that problem is still
interfering with my life, keeping some of my abilities from working
for me when I need them to. We had a session-- which she didn't
charge me for-- to help alleviate that problem, but unfortunately it
was interrupted before we could make any progress. With a little
luck, I might be able to schedule another appointment next week-- but
right now, the weather here is terrible.

Ron

The National Council for Hypnotherapy (NCH) have issued a video  interview
with a client discussing misconceptions about hypnotherapy, etc.   Contact NCH
for information on getting permission to use the clip on your  own website.

_http://www.youtube.com/v/7FhUsqs8ZJQ&hl_
(http://www.youtube.com/v/7FhUsqs8ZJQ&hl)

Paul Howard, marketing director of NCH, writes,

We have created a video of an hypnotherapy client talking about the  process
of hypnotherapy. This is intended as a myth busting video for you to  use on
your website. To reassure prospective clients and to dismiss any myths  and
misleading information they may have heard about hypnotherapy. We have been
running it on test for the last few  weeks and it has been very popular with the
new clients that have seen  it.

We have agreed specific wording to be used on your website  to announce the
video. The wording is
"See an _NCH_ (http://www.hypnotherapists.org.uk/)  video of a typical client
discussing their experience with  hypnotherapy."
You should include the hyperlink to the NCH on  the word NCH.
If you would like to see this video in action  simply go to
_http://www.sich.co.uk/media_stories.htm_
(http://www.sich.co.uk/media_stories.htm)  for  an
example of the implementation.

Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
College Principal & Executive  Director

Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist (NCH)
Registered  Psychotherapist (UKCP)
Member of the European Register of Psychotherapists  (ERP)
Fellow of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health  (RSPH)


The UK College of  Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy Ltd.
_www.UKhypnosis.com_ (http://www.ukhypnosis.com/)

Freephone (UK)  0800 195 9809
Fax: 01403 265 015
International +44(0)1403248266
UKCHH,  Suite 127, 17 Piries Place, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1BF

Hypno-CBTź is  the registered trademark of The UK College of Hypnosis &
Hypnotherapy  Ltd.
Registered in England as Company No. 05499462, UK Register of Learning
Providers No.10008042
VAT Registration 920 1916 52

UKCHH Ltd.  Disclaimer, Terms, & Copyright
Copyright (c) UKCHH Ltd., unless  otherwise stated. This email is
confidential and intended solely for the use of  the addressee. If you are not
the
intended recipient then the disclosure,  copying or distribution to others of
any
part or whole of this message is  strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
imediately and delete the  email.

This message has been scanned for viruses before sending. UKCHH  Ltd. accepts
no responsibility for infection and recommends you scan both email  and
contents.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

2008/12/16 Duncan Gunn <duncan@...>:
> ... I was amazed, and
> somewhat amused, that our conversation about hypnotherapy had reminded my
> friend of her recent brush with black-magic!
Its closer than you think! I dont study that hard but the more I learn
about shamanism and witchery the more I see a mix of valid practise
and superstition and corruption.

> Therapists did use some hypnosis but that they didn't promote it to the
> public as they were worried that the public may think it too "weird" (my
> quotes are their words). This, they said, was down to the perceptual damage
> done by stage hypnosis.
I think that is the excuse they use.
From my mind/bdy experiences it seems obvious our ego/self resists
change at a profound level.  Hypnosis involving putting a person into
a deeply relaxed state has a problem. This state is meditative - in it
the systems that de-stress you and release neurosis start to operate
better. This produces profound change that the ego/self resists. Its
job is to keep you intact. These profound changes start to dismantle
your 'ego/self'. This resistance creates an instinctive aversion to
'spooky' things that might change you. As with politics and much human
behaviour the 'view' is instinctive the 'reasons' given are the best
justifications the subcocnious can come up with.
We have a constant battle in our subconcious as our meditative systems
try to work and our ego/self tries to keep them dulled. Even a
suggestion of introspection is enough to arouse this resistance. I
believe boredom is disquiet created by the ego/self to make you seek
external stimulation to drown out the surfacing of this internal
battle.
Hypnotherapy will arouse this resistance in  many people. Medically
trained people have a worse resistance than most. Their ego/self makes
them important and makes them think their science is powerful and
complete.  Ideas of hypnosis subvert this view and will be resisted.
There is no escaping it.
I believe this explains why the evidence for it's efectiveness tends
to be ignored rather than fought against.
DO people find that if you offer to show a friend what deeply relaxed
really is they say
'I like being relaxed so yes please' or do they go 'No Thanks'? Why
would they say no? Or is just my manner?

Keith.

2008/12/15  <HypnoSynthesisUK@...>:
> .... Braid emphasised, against the
> Mesmerists, that it was really the client who brought about the cure or
> effect and not the hypnotist or Mesmerist.

>  In support of this, > surprisingly, Braid enthusiastically quoted reports of
yogic meditation
> brought back by the East India Company soldiers, etc.  Braid reasoned that
> if yogins could experience similar effects, in solitary meditation, then
> that indirectly supported his argument that the effects of Mesmerism did not
> require a Mesmerist but originated within the subject's own mind and body.
It is so rare to hear of a western 'pioneer' of these things giving
praise to eastern things! There is a lot of western 're-discovery' of
ancient things but I suspect a lot of the time ideas and techniques
are taken and the taker pretends they discovered it themselves.
My expereince of yoga and mediation has been that doing the techniques
taught allows self righting/adjusting systems to function - systems
that are supressed by the ravages of stress in the modern world.
If suggestion could change the balance of the bodies systems towards
health then what other interventions could? In the ancient world as
civilisation developed it must have been obvious that hierachical
society (especially with injustice and inequality) caused collapsed
posture and the related loss of calm, grace and equanimity of self.
A colossal amount of experimentation gave us what we have today - a
diverse range of techniques that alter our state and allow subconcious
systems to work more effectively.
These techniques range from the seemingly simple - like basic
meditation (single point focus, using the breath to relax) thru basic
yoga (stretching to stimulate emotional/muscle release, stimulating
glands) to the odd but powerful extreme tantric/yoga practises.
I see in these things a split between the explanations of the
practioners and the techniques themselves. It is possible the
explanations are designed to take a persons concious mind away from
the areas being addressed so the subconcious can work on them
unhindered by concious meddling.
Also the explanations are 'tainted' by religious/superstitious
beliefs/wishes and the egotistical nature of the minor practioners who
want to claim spiritual superiorty over their followers. Even this is
complicated as a truly great teacher may well attribute all sorts of
things to external energies and entities so he can stay humble - not
be swayed by constant praise.

  > Braid had initially used focused attention and shallow breathing to induce
> hypnotism, and he noted that certain reports of pranayama alluded to similar
> sorts of means.
We are taught the breath passing over nose and mouth internals where
nerve endings are close to the skin stimulates the para-sympathetic
nervous system. The sympathetic nervous system is over-active in a
stressed person so this brings it more into line. As the
para-sympathetic has failed to allow release of so much past tension
it requires serious prolonged stimulation.
I oftern wonder why in buddhism you count the breath from 1 to 10 but
in hypnosis you count backwards. Its something to do with hypnosis
focusing on just relaxing but in buddhism the focus is different.
Also in hypnosis you slump but in buddhism you want to stimulate the
postural systems of the spine.

>  Braid also hypnotised himself to help with his rheumatic
> pain, and he saw this as further evidence that the effects did not require
> another person to channel any invisible energy, etc., into the subject.
This blocking neural pathways to 'disable' systems is big in
buddhism/yoga. Tapping the toungue on the lips and mouth (mantra) and
tapping fingure tips somehow does this. Its the breaking of links that
let the buddha give us his map of how the mind works.  I'm curious to
know how a hypnotherapists experience matches a buddhists. I'm a bit
of a beginner - I cant 'switch off' pain. I had an experience of
'rising above it' of seperation from the body - the pain was there but
it was tolerable. This led to a complete disconnect from emotional
history - no neurosis, no past - total freedom and feeling utterly
grand. Do you get that in hypnosis? My trainer said this is 'showing
the way' This is more and more how you will be if you keep at it.

> However, people have a well-known tendency to "misattribute" unusual effects
> to unusual causes.... Likewise, as you say, New Age therapies exploit the same
> confusion and lead clients to assume that the improvements they experience
> have more to do with some special power of the healer, etc., than with their
> own attitude and imagination.
I think it is not concious exploitation - it is the murky workings of
the ego building a world view that is grand and coherent where the 'I'
is important. New Age therapies are often pale shadows of valid yogic
type techniques. But yogic techniques require a lot of time and self
discipline and hard work,


>  CBT places considerable emphasis, in contrast
> with Freudian psychoanalysis, upon the idea that the client is helping
> themselves with the support of the therapist, not being passively "cured" by
> a healer or guru figure.
The more meditaiton I do the more Freud seems daft! Its not one trauma
screwing up the subconcious but layer upon layer of trauma. In our
world a 'normal' person is well out of adjustment. The overexcited
system is plagued by constant firing of fear/aversion reflexes that
don't get released. Nearly anything is traumatic. This results in us
being in some weird fight-or-flight mode but the mind can't find the
source of the fear so it attributes it to daft things like spiders or
the fear of ruination due to an inappropriately shaped body.  Or just
general anxiety - low grade fear with no identifiable cause.

Yogi saying 'That stuff didn't get in there by logic and logic won't
get it out'. That's the western mistake - to look for reasoned
solutions. But the problem is the non-release of the reflexes. Every
serious zen or yoga person experiences catharsis again and again and
again. This is not 'scientific' but its bleedin' obvious to the
practitioner.
Interestingly many mind/body systems (like much western AT & Tai Chi &
much meditation) proceed at such a gentle pace the release happens
mostly below concious awareness (or doesnt happen at all!). The
'quick' ones like serious zen and Kundalini yoga cause a lot to come
to awareness. It is a surprise to see how much emotion is below
awareness.

> .... improvement is mainly due to the therapist, they're wrong, and that makes
> them more dependant upon the financial arrangement -if they relapse they
> need to go back and pay for more therapy.
I remember your story of the man who said psychothepray worked which
is why he had been having it all his life!
I believe the serial therapy goer is a often victim of the ego/self.
The kundalini yoga program is designed to make it very hard to deny
our workings. If you do as taught you will change - release
tension/repression - you can't escape it. But a large number of people
stop within their comfort zone - instinctively their subconcious finds
a way to deny change. These are often the people that will pay for
this and that and be happy with fleeting improvements or even delusory
ones. What is fascinating is that these people can't 'see' the changes
in those around them - those changes deny their world view. I had a
psychotherapist friend that got more and more awkward each time I saw
her - I believe it was because I was living denial of her views!  She
did yoga to ge a flat tummy and didn't change. I did it to stay alive
and changed a lot.

>  On the other hand, if the client
> finds their own power to help themselves they are more likely to maintain
> their improvement in the future without further help.
That has been my blessing. Having no money to pay for help but
suffering badly from stress I was forced to shop around and found
these odd eastern self-help programs.  So I can live in my ruination
without being very stressed at all. I hear all these poor sods
bleating about fear of the bailiffs and losing jobs and I have lived
with it for years - this last year even quite cheerfully. I am very
lucky in one way at least. But it requires an odd view - that I am
just a mis-adjusted animal and if I do my yoga my system will adjust
to give me neutral state. Mundane and time consuming.

> Braid actually said the role of the hypnotist was like a train driver, as I
> recall.  I think he meant that the hypnotist merely pulls the right levers,
> etc., but it is the engine (the client's mind) that does all the work.
I guess thats a difference. Basic yoga is 'Do this and your system
will sort itself out'. This mirrors 'Swallow this it will make you
better' but the yogic techniques work at a very fundamental level. As
you do the techniques you get a feel for how you work and what you
need to work on. Buts not at the levers in the cab level. It is more
oiling the wheels and adjusting the venting of the boiler. Then the
levers work better.

Keith.

This is an interesting article that highlights a much deeper and more
general issue.  I think the paradox here is that some of the most  entertaining
fiction plays upon childhood patterns of "magical thinking" which,  if taken
literally, often lead to an immature and unrealistic view of the world  and
other
people.  To pick a different example, "good versus evil" is  probably one of
the most familiar themes in literature, and the movies.   However, many clients
suffer from thinking about other people in overly  "black-and-white" terms
like this, failing to recognise that their "enemies" are  often just ordinary
people who they fail to get along with.  This is  especially true of high
fantasy
literature.  For example, Tolkein's Lord of  the Rings was written during the
Second World War and supposedly, to put it  crudely, the orcs and goblins are
the Germans!  It's obviously not helpful,  or humane, to think about other
people in inflated "good versus evil" terms like  that, though.

_BBC  NEWS | Scotland | Edinburgh, East and Fife | Rom-coms 'spoil your love
life'_ (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7784366.stm)

Watching romantic comedies can spoil your love life, a study  by a university
in Edinburgh has claimed.
Rom-coms have been blamed by relationship experts at Heriot Watt University
for promoting unrealistic expectations when it comes to love.
They found fans of films such as Runaway Bride and Notting Hill often fail to
  communicate with their partner.
Many held the view if someone is meant to be with you, then they should know
what you want without you telling them.
Psychologists at the family and personal relationships laboratory at the
university studied 40 top box office hits between 1995 and 2005, and identified
common themes which they believed were unrealistic.

Yours  Sincerely,

Donald Robertson
College Principal & Executive  Director

Senior Clinician Hypnotherapist (NCH)
Registered  Psychotherapist (UKCP)
Member of the European Register of Psychotherapists  (ERP)
Fellow of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health  (RSPH)


The UK College of  Hypnosis & Hypnotherapy Ltd.
_www.UKhypnosis.com_ (http://www.ukhypnosis.com/)

Freephone (UK)  0800 195 9809
Fax: 01403 265 015
International +44(0)1403248266
UKCHH,  Suite 127, 17 Piries Place, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1BF

Hypno-CBTź is  the registered trademark of The UK College of Hypnosis &
Hypnotherapy  Ltd.
Registered in England as Company No. 05499462, UK Register of Learning
Providers No.10008042
VAT Registration 920 1916 52

UKCHH Ltd.  Disclaimer, Terms, & Copyright
Copyright (c) UKCHH Ltd., unless  otherwise stated. This email is
confidential and intended solely for the use of  the addressee. If you are not
the
intended recipient then the disclosure,  copying or distribution to others of
any
part or whole of this message is  strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
imediately and delete the  email.

This message has been scanned for viruses before sending. UKCHH  Ltd. accepts
no responsibility for infection and recommends you scan both email  and
contents.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

To move ever so slightly off-thread...but it does relate to the public
perceptions of hypnotherapy...I have two tales to tell.



A few weeks ago I was buying my morning coffee at my local café and was
chatting to the owner, a well educated, intelligent person. We had just
begun to talk about some aspects of hypnotherapy when she stopped me and
said that the conversation had reminded her of something. She then proceeded
to tell me about her recent holiday to Scotland where her and her husband
had come across a house where, in the front garden, was placed a pole with a
skull upon it. The house, it appeared, was inhabited by a ‘black witch’ who
sold her services to help people with their problems. I was amazed, and
somewhat amused, that our conversation about hypnotherapy had reminded my
friend of her recent brush with black-magic!



From the public perception, now, to a professional one; only yesterday did I
have my first brush with mental health professionals having concerns about
hypnotherapy. This was not because they did not agree with its effectiveness
but that they did not want to promote it because of the “public concern
regarding stage hypnosis”. The context is that I was promoting my practice
to a local private mental health clinic. They told me that their CB
Therapists did use some hypnosis but that they didn’t promote it to the
public as they were worried that the public may think it too “weird” (my
quotes are their words). This, they said, was down to the perceptual damage
done by stage hypnosis.



My point? To say that I agree with those on here who promote the empirical
testing of hypnosis and therefore evidence-based treatments for clients.
Stories such as those I have just told are not uncommon and hypnotherapy is
still considered by many, outside the psychotherapeutic world, to be just
another untested ‘alternative’ health remedy. I think it is our duty, not
only to ourselves but to our clients, to become a part of the mainstream
mental health world. As some on this forum may know, I am also a registered
architect in the UK; a title I worked hard to attain and a title which is
protected by English and Welsh (and Scottish) Law. Probably not likely to
happen in my life time, although quite a youngster really, but I would
dearly like to see the term ‘hypnotherapist’ similarly protected. (By
“protected” I mean that only those having completed and passed a course
approved and monitored by a government-approved regulator may pass
themselves off as a hypnotherapist). Architects, Doctors, psychiatrists are
all such protected titles. At the moment hypnotherapy is far too open to
quackery!



From another thread Ron has been asking us to accept that certain psi
abilities under hypnosis have been tested. As a curious and investigative
bunch, I’m sure we would be interested to here where we can read about the
research  processes and results, Ron. Could you let us all know?



Duncan Gunn MNCH(Lic) GHR(Reg)





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> 2 - They will take to the first explanation they are given and not
> modify their belief in the light of evidence or alternatives.

To be fair, most people don't have backgrounds in neurology,
psychology, and medicine to make informed decisions; they have to go by
what the so-called "experts" say; what else is there for them otherwise?

Ron

------
"No I don't believe in luck. No I don't believe in circumstance no
more. Accidents never happen in a perfect world...  Could have planned
it all; precognition in my ears."

- Blondie -

Hi Ron,
2008/12/14 Ron Hubbard <hubbard_ron@...>:
> ... the mechanisms of what's
> involved in hypnosis hadn't been even remotely understood for a very
> long time, and even now, I don't know how many
> hypnotists/hypnotherapists really understand what goes on in the brain
> when hypnosis is brought into play.
.....
> There's a schism: the hypnotists don't care about the physiological
> aspects nor do the neurologists care about what happens with hypnosis-

I actually think the ancient yogi/buddhists probably understand this
stuff better that anyone. If you are very  internally sensitive you
can learn a lot about how we work - psychologically and physically
(actually psycho-physically as at a certain depth there is no
seperation (but maybe they seperate again at a greater depth..).
A neurologist is different from a yogi in the same way that a
mathematician who has equations explaining harmonics is different from
a conductor who makes an orchestra great. One job is pure science the
other is intuition and 'empirical science'.  There is a continuum
between these poles and hypnotherapy is in the middle of it.

> Then you add in the psi aspects and most people tune out.
As I do!

>  But just because you don't want to believe in something, that does not
> make reality untrue.
Hmmmmm! Just because you experience something or other people
experience it and tell you about it doesn't make it true either! It
may feel like truth but many of our feelings are not reliable.

>  There *are* people who have demonstrated telekinesis
> while-- and only while-- under hypnosis.
OK where's the proof? Exceptional proof required for such exceptional
claims please.  Currently it seems to me if such things exist they are
so weak or useless that they can't be simply proved.

> there are many
> mainstream scientists who don't tow the line and believe in psi
> abilities whether they can be proven in a lab or not.

I am very interested in this business of belief and strange things -
as I have strange belifs myself. My current conclusions are:-
1 - Only a small percentage of humans are able to remove or change a
belief in the face of evidence.

2 - Most people need to have explanations of things which can't be
understood by them. So there is much superstitious belief about. So
many of these beliefs have been rolled back by modern science that I
regard it as highly likely many current common beliefs will be
delusory. The are many written claims 'proving' things that fall apart
under scutiny - the UFO & psi press is like this. If there are genuine
events they are rare and lost in the 'noise' of nonsense.

3 - I have personal experience of things which most people think are
scientifically impossible. Their beliefs are not scientific - they are
'faith based' - they have an excessive faith that science can explain
everything eventually. My experiences are personal and I cant prove
their validity to sceptics and people who will not try to gain the
same experiences I have had.

4 - Most people that have had the same 'mystic' (horrible word but
romantic!) experiences interpret them very differently than me - so
there may be doubt that we have actually have shared the experience.

5 - As there is so little external support for my interpretation of my
experiences I must doubt them.

Q - So what is certain then?
A - Not much that matters!

Q - Is that a problem?
A - No it is a huge benefit if you can 'realise' this. The urge to
'understand' what can't be understood and the urge to 'construct a
reality' that is more exciting and 'firm' than the mundaneness of the
'shallow reality' that forms naturally in the mind of a person subject
to the stresses of 'civilised' life is a big problem. This problem
manifests as an over-excited nervous system, huge amounts of
unreleased muscle tension & generalised impairment of all the bodies
systems - resulting in all sorts of health problems.

So here's a belief for you Ron - I believe if you addressed the above
issues your Fibromyalgia would go away! And the strength of your
beliefs would wane as you lost muscle tension in the torso.
What a strange belief I have! And no evidence to back it up. So I
would not expect you to believe the same.

I also believe a hypnotherapist that takes money off you to cultivate
your psi abilities should offer you a full refund if you dont get a
clear demonstrable result from it. Many of my yogi colleagues claim
'psi' experiences but I can't see what benefit they get except a sense
of being part of something special - which I take as a sign their ego
plays a bigger part in their workings than they think! Either that or
they are further down the path than me - I don't know.

Good luck,
Keith.
PS If you win the lottery shortly I may be in for some serious doubting....
PPS I believe there are subtle ways we influence each others systems
which are well beyond current science. 'Mirror' neurons triggered
visually are known to science but I think all our known senses
probably participate in 'mirroring'. And our elecro-magnetic fields
might and maybe there is even more......  This influencing anothers
system thru mirroring gets interpreted as 'energy' chanelling as it
was by the mesmerists.

PPPPPPPPS But I still don't believe in 'meaningful' long range
instantaneous communication!

Hello enquirers,
> Franz Mesmer ... believed that he was channelling an invisible
> energy from outer space, through his body, and into the body of the
> subject.

The Orientals have Chi/Ki. The Indians have Prana which can pass in
and out the crown of the head.

When I send a wave of relaxation from the top of my head down my spine
etc I can 'feel' something like such a wave. Any explanations for what
I am feeling? Is it the Chi etc?

Keith

2008/12/15 Donald Robertson <HypnoSynthesisUK@...>:
> Franz Mesmer ... believed that he was channelling an invisible
> energy from outer space, through his body, and into the body of the
> subject. Mesmer therefore believed that the effects he perceived,
> therapeutic improvement, muscular seizures, emotional "crises", etc.,
> were mainly due to his power rather than to the belief or
> expectation, etc., of the client.

Its so great to read this again - it should be on poster boards around
the land!
I explore various alternative things when I can and it amazes me that
when a person is guided to some sort of altered psycho-physical state
by a healer or yogi or 'energy chaneller' they are so impressed that
they believe the 'healers' explanation of what is going on and parrot
it for the rest of their lives. Even to the point that they believe
conflicting explanations simultaneously.
They have no awareness that their unfamiliar state change tends to
confuse and 'open' their mind and makes them very suggestible. It
seems that the majority of humans have 2 'flaws'
1 - They prefer a 'spiritual energy' explanation (lke Mesmer's above)
over a 'scientific' explanation of the form 'We aren't sure how this
works but much experience and experimentation has shown that it does'.
2 - They will take to the first explanation they are given and not
modify their belief in the light of evidence or alternatives.

I think these 2 'flaws' are what allows much of the 'alternative
health' industry to flourish. Another common 'flaw' is that people
will spend money on all sorts of things and dont seem able to
rationally study their own self well enough to notice that they get no
real benefit from so much of what they spend their money on!

Keith.