Hypnosis Without Trance?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Aaron Little on October 27, 2009 at 10:47am

Awesome. I just finished reading the report. Thank you very much for sharing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Tripp on October 27, 2009 at 11:01am

Wow Aaron - you're fast!

James

Aaron Little said:

Awesome. I just finished reading the report. Thank you very much for sharing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Aaron Little on October 27, 2009 at 11:44am

I saw your post on a different forum this morning.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on October 27, 2009 at 1:44pm

James,
It looks like you are discovering the true nature of trance. I have found that trance is simply a natural state for us as a species where we automatically react to outside input. It is how we are able to multi-task.

I have defined hypnosis as simply the purposeful induction of a trance state by whatever means is successful. I have videos on here that give examples of it.

Cheers
John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh Cole on October 27, 2009 at 1:57pm

Hi James;
I think your work is interesting.... But new and innovative ...No. Those are all great suggestibility tests and the onset of trance induction for sure. I would suggest you watch Brian David Phillips "sticky stuck" videos, or take a look at some of the work of John Cleesattel. You also might want to check out performers like Justin Tranz and Richard Nongard both of whom use similar "warm up" demos before starting a show. Except for Justin, they are all on the site In the meantime you are more than welcome to share your insights here on hypnothoughts, but if you prefer your own blog... That's fine too.

Hugh Cole
The Pretty Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Tripp on October 27, 2009 at 2:03pm

Mr Green said:

James,
I'm reading your report watching the vids, it's Ace.
Some may say It's a different approach to many of the traditional methods which I guess leans more towards your skills as an NLP'er and mentalist.


Thank You Paul! And I hope you continue to enjoy it in the future!

James
Good luck with it fella. I think it's great.

PDF is very interesting, looking forward to the teachings on the blog.

Paul~

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Tripp on October 27, 2009 at 2:14pm

Hi John

I have to say John that I must disagree. My belief is that my video demonstrates no evidence for trance, and in fact offers evidence for the redundancy of trance as an explanation for hypnotic phenomena.

Now I'm not saying that I don't believe in 'trance', but I am saying that I believe it plays no essential part in the generation of hypnotic phenomena - unless you believe that people are in 'trance' all the time, in which case it becomes a bit of a redundant concept!

Anyhows, thank you for the feedback. I do hope that you get the chance to read my report so as you can understand my position better.

All the very best

James

http://www.hypnosiswithouttrance.com/

John Cleesattel said:

James,
It looks like you are discovering the true nature of trance. I have found that trance is simply a natural state for us as a species where we automatically react to outside input. It is how we are able to multi-task. I have defined hypnosis as simply the purposeful induction of a trance state by whatever means is successful. I have videos on here that give examples of it.

Cheers
John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian David Phillips on October 27, 2009 at 3:45pm

Actually, I will be speaking on this very subject for the next Hypnosummit. :-) This comes down to how you define "trance" as to whether that's the loopy feeling some folks get or if it's the simple critical factor bypass of hypnosis. What James is doing here is what I call "suggestibility effect sequencing" and there are a whole bunch of videos of this sort of eyes-open hypnosis on my youtube channel. So many folks make the mistake of thinking hypnosis requires eye closure or relaxation or the like or mistakenly dismissing suggestibility effects as tests when in fact they are inductions. Eye closure or that trancey loopy feeling are never required for hypnosis, they are simply things that we attach the trance or hypnosis to.

There are a number of "no such thing as hypnosis" working hypnotists who use this approach of eyes open suggestibility sequencing in order to do shows that have "no trance" and therefore "no such thing as hypnosis" but are actually simply doing waking hypnosis which is just as good as any other hypnosis. The Amazing Kreskin started off doing hypnosis shows but when his primary market began regulating them he started doing this sort of thing and now still makes the claim that there is no such thing as hypnosis even though that's what he's doing. :-)

The names escape me, but there are a few folks currently working in the UK milking that particular cow.

Of course, James is not saying that . . . he's rightfully identifying what he does as hypnosis.

Well done, James. Nice video.

All the best,
Brian
http://www.briandavidphillips.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on October 27, 2009 at 7:30pm

James,
Okay then, we will agree to disagree :) Brian Phillips said it best when he said "it all depends on how you define trance". I gave my definition of trance in my reply to you, and if you think about that definition, it does indeed require people to be in some sort of trance state most of the time, which I have found to be true (and very useful!).

You do appear to be fairly proficient at it in your video, although we can't hear what you are saying. If it works for you, then by all means continue to pursue it :)

John

James Rolph said:

Hi John

I have to say John that I must disagree. My belief is that my video demonstrates no evidence for trance, and in fact offers evidence for the redundancy of trance as an explanation for hypnotic phenomena.

Now I'm not saying that I don't believe in 'trance', but I am saying that I believe it plays no essential part in the generation of hypnotic phenomena - unless you believe that people are in 'trance' all the time, in which case it becomes a bit of a redundant concept!

Anyhows, thank you for the feedback. I do hope that you get the chance to read my report so as you can understand my position better.

All the very best

James

http://www.hypnosiswithouttrance.com/

John Cleesattel said:

James,
It looks like you are discovering the true nature of trance. I have found that trance is simply a natural state for us as a species where we automatically react to outside input. It is how we are able to multi-task. I have defined hypnosis as simply the purposeful induction of a trance state by whatever means is successful. I have videos on here that give examples of it.

Cheers
John

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Leshem Yosef on October 28, 2009 at 12:26am

Hi James
I like how you do it in a very pro way
I just didn’t understand it
What is the different between what you do to waking hypnosis and suggestibility tests?
Do you have a special way that you have stronger effect more then the usual waking hypnosis that other don’t do or know?
Many mentalist do amazing stuff with waking hypnosis and the power of imagination with eyes open and without any relaxation and conventional trance what is the different in the way you do it? [ like Derren brown style ]for example :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJPBZtmaANI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr-QtNE9k84

With respect

Yosef

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Tripp on October 28, 2009 at 12:39am

Hi Brian

For me it is an honour to have you reply here 'cause I've seen your stuff on Youtube and love it. I was trying to get my wife to get me a bunch of your vid's for my birthday, but she didn't :-(

Back to the subject, if 'trance' is a simple critical faculty bypass, then I do use that concept - except I refer to it as hypnotic focus. This is not just a matter of 're-branding' however, because I do use 'trance' as well - only, not as an essential component in hypnosis. for me hypnotic focus is...

…an uncritical focus on current and/or anticipated experience.

This is different from 'trance' because there is:

1. No concept of depth
2. No significant difference from other everyday waking states (apart from that of critical evaluation).

Now I know that I could call 'hypnotic focus', 'trance' but then how would I differentiate it from the state that many recognise as trance ("eyes closed, relaxation, depth etc.), which is the state that so many hypnotist seem to be obsessed with.

Thanks for the reply Brian

James
http://hypnosiswithouttrance.com/


Brian David Phillips said:

Actually, I will be speaking on this very subject for the next Hypnosummit. :-) This comes down to how you define "trance" as to whether that's the loopy feeling some folks get or if it's the simple critical factor bypass of hypnosis. What James is doing here is what I call "suggestibility effect sequencing" and there are a whole bunch of videos of this sort of eyes-open hypnosis on my youtube channel. So many folks make the mistake of thinking hypnosis requires eye closure or relaxation or the like or mistakenly dismissing suggestibility effects as tests when in fact they are inductions. Eye closure or that trancey loopy feeling are never required for hypnosis, they are simply things that we attach the trance or hypnosis to.

There are a number of "no such thing as hypnosis" working hypnotists who use this approach of eyes open suggestibility sequencing in order to do shows that have "no trance" and therefore "no such thing as hypnosis" but are actually simply doing waking hypnosis which is just as good as any other hypnosis. The Amazing Kreskin started off doing hypnosis shows but when his primary market began regulating them he started doing this sort of thing and now still makes the claim that there is no such thing as hypnosis even though that's what he's doing. :-)

The names escape me, but there are a few folks currently working in the UK milking that particular cow.

Of course, James is not saying that . . . he's rightfully identifying what he does as hypnosis.

Well done, James. Nice video.

All the best,
Brian
http://www.briandavidphillips.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James Tripp on October 28, 2009 at 12:56am

Hi Yosef

There isn't a great deal of difference - as many of my UK colleagues have noted, waking hypnosis is my specialism!

What I do have that is different is a unique (I believe) model for how hypnosis works, which is a process model rather than a state model. And my model is a practical one, which helps me and others I have shared it with be more effective as hypnotists.

Please understand that I am not claiming to be any kind of hypnosis Guru - I'm not! I'm just a guy who loves hypnosis and hypnotising and figuring out the most effective ways to approach things. I am sharing my ideas because I have been encouraged to do so by some of the street hypnosis and NLP crews here in the UK.

Anyhows Yosef, I do hope you have a read of my stuff and watch out for my video tutorials and performance bits. If their is something you can use there, then great. If not, nothing lost because it is all free!

All the very best

James
http://hypnosiswithouttrance.com/

Leshem Yosef said:

Hi James
I like how you do it in a very pro way
I just didn’t understand it
What is the different between what you do to waking hypnosis and suggestibility tests?
Do you have a special way that you have stronger effect more then the usual waking hypnosis that other don’t do or know?
Many mentalist do amazing stuff with waking hypnosis and the power of imagination with eyes open and without any relaxation and conventional trance what is the different in the way you do it? [ like Derren brown style ]for example :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJPBZtmaANI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr-QtNE9k84

With respect

Yosef

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page