the Free Hypnosis Social Network
Photo Reading and Enhanced Memory
I read about photo reading and it seems to good to be true. I know how powerful the mind is but I just don't buy it.
Can the subconscious mind really absorb all that information? It just seems like a scam.
On a less skeptical note, does every experience you've ever been through stored in your unconscious memory bank? Can these be retrieved by hypnosis? I've heard of people claiming it is possible and others disclaiming it, can anyone verify this? It is merely a question asked by a few people I know about exams etc.
Conca
Can the subconscious mind really absorb all that information? It just seems like a scam.
On a less skeptical note, does every experience you've ever been through stored in your unconscious memory bank? Can these be retrieved by hypnosis? I've heard of people claiming it is possible and others disclaiming it, can anyone verify this? It is merely a question asked by a few people I know about exams etc.
Conca
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Greg M on -
I wish you well with your graduate studies. Did your professor approve your research topic yet?
Interesting thread with some excellent replies! Thanks!
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin on -
Well, I am still working on my question but I feel like Im coming to the end of the research...I say another day or so...
and I must agree, lots of good replies :D
Greg M said:I wish you well with your graduate studies. Did your professor approve your research topic yet?
Interesting thread with some excellent replies! Thanks!
-
Permalink Reply by Greg M on
-
Hi Conca
Can't blame you for wanting proof with all the wild claims being made out there. Seems the fields of chemistry and biology have put the snake oil sellers of 100 years ago out of business, so now the hucksters are out looking for new fields.
Points to ponder:
If only one person on the planet can do it successfully, is it proven? How about 5 people? 10? Perhaps, but how useful? How many would accept that kind of proof? What if the person/people who can "do" it have some other attribute that accounts for it, but it wasn't discovered or studied?
If it fails to work with 50% of the population, but works with 50% to some significant degree, is it "debunked?" 20/80%? How about if it works only with people who have a certain genetic quirk in their dopamine or seratonin system? Or people who had phonics as a kid instead of some other approach to reading? People who learned to read earlier or later than others? How about gender and the corpus collossum?
In my life, I've read many things in many books and articles, often not being convinced at the time of the claims being made. Since then, I have seen a good many of those phenomena come to pass, at least partially, and occasionally well beyond the initial claim. I have learned to keep an open mind to the possibility, see if the theory makes more sense than the claim or vice versa, try to consider an alternate theory to support the phenomena from another perspective, etc. It's been a fascinating journey.
I used to think past lives were an imaginary metaphor for the SC to communicate with the CM. Then I visited Colonial Williamsburg and sat outside for the fife and drum recital. During the performance, I was transported, for about 3 seconds, to a past life I once had. The images flooded me from nowhere, completely filled me with body awareness, sights, sounds, smells, and emotion tagged to the 3-second moment. At the end of the program, the titles of the pieces played were announced and the title of that particular piece exactly matched my 3 second "visit." It was convincing, and I remain convinced to this day. No proof, just belief. Could have been a mental image projected by one of the musicians, for all I know, but it felt real and it felt all mine. Now that I do believe in past lives, I have access to an open library of volumes of previously learned lessons. Until I embraced that belief in the possibility, the library doors were locked. I was trapped in a realm of metaphor only. Now I have both.
If you believe it cannot work, by all means, don't waste your time on it. If you wish to borrow a belief from someone here, or a link to someone else's belief (offered as proof - one thing I know about psych reseach is that there are way more bogus studies than good ones), it begs a question: Why? Why not remain open to the idea, toy with it, and see what it has to offer you? Sure, you may never read or retain a word according to the method, but what about the other lessons, the ones where you learn something from the inner library or the universal library? What does this question (in your original post) remind you of that you've already been through before? Where is it leading that you resist going, or require assurances in advance of going there?
From the energy generated by the discussion and all the postings made by these many participants, I'd say the journey's already been worth it. I offer all of this in the spirit of growth and expanding our collective knowledge and experience base. I truly hope I have conveyed my ideas in that light, and humbly apologize if I have not.
Namaste!
Greg
Conca said:Ok, I understand that I'm just not willing to sacrifice my time on something unproven, I am interested but only if there is sufficient evidence to prove it is possible.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin on
-
+1
Very good job Greg M
100% agree with what you have to say...
Greg M said:Hi Conca
Can't blame you for wanting proof with all the wild claims being made out there. Seems the fields of chemistry and biology have put the snake oil sellers of 100 years ago out of business, so now the hucksters are out looking for new fields.
Points to ponder:
If only one person on the planet can do it successfully, is it proven? How about 5 people? 10? Perhaps, but how useful? How many would accept that kind of proof? What if the person/people who can "do" it have some other attribute that accounts for it, but it wasn't discovered or studied?
If it fails to work with 50% of the population, but works with 50% to some significant degree, is it "debunked?" 20/80%? How about if it works only with people who have a certain genetic quirk in their dopamine or seratonin system? Or people who had phonics as a kid instead of some other approach to reading? People who learned to read earlier or later than others? How about gender and the corpus collossum?
In my life, I've read many things in many books and articles, often not being convinced at the time of the claims being made. Since then, I have seen a good many of those phenomena come to pass, at least partially, and occasionally well beyond the initial claim. I have learned to keep an open mind to the possibility, see if the theory makes more sense than the claim or vice versa, try to consider an alternate theory to support the phenomena from another perspective, etc. It's been a fascinating journey.
I used to think past lives were an imaginary metaphor for the SC to communicate with the CM. Then I visited Colonial Williamsburg and sat outside for the fife and drum recital. During the performance, I was transported, for about 3 seconds, to a past life I once had. The images flooded me from nowhere, completely filled me with body awareness, sights, sounds, smells, and emotion tagged to the 3-second moment. At the end of the program, the titles of the pieces played were announced and the title of that particular piece exactly matched my 3 second "visit." It was convincing, and I remain convinced to this day. No proof, just belief. Could have been a mental image projected by one of the musicians, for all I know, but it felt real and it felt all mine. Now that I do believe in past lives, I have access to an open library of volumes of previously learned lessons. Until I embraced that belief in the possibility, the library doors were locked. I was trapped in a realm of metaphor only. Now I have both.
If you believe it cannot work, by all means, don't waste your time on it. If you wish to borrow a belief from someone here, or a link to someone else's belief (offered as proof - one thing I know about psych reseach is that there are way more bogus studies than good ones), it begs a question: Why? Why not remain open to the idea, toy with it, and see what it has to offer you? Sure, you may never read or retain a word according to the method, but what about the other lessons, the ones where you learn something from the inner library or the universal library? What does this question (in your original post) remind you of that you've already been through before? Where is it leading that you resist going, or require assurances in advance of going there?
From the energy generated by the discussion and all the postings made by these many participants, I'd say the journey's already been worth it. I offer all of this in the spirit of growth and expanding our collective knowledge and experience base. I truly hope I have conveyed my ideas in that light, and humbly apologize if I have not.
Namaste!
Greg
Conca said:Ok, I understand that I'm just not willing to sacrifice my time on something unproven, I am interested but only if there is sufficient evidence to prove it is possible.
-
Permalink Reply by Connor Wyatt on -
Yes definitely, I just have my A level studies to do at the moment and I don't want those to suffer because of something that may not work (I'm not saying it won't, I'm just covering my back in a way.) During one of the holidays I'll study it and if I get results I'll carry on.
Conca
Greg M said:Hi Conca
Can't blame you for wanting proof with all the wild claims being made out there. Seems the fields of chemistry and biology have put the snake oil sellers of 100 years ago out of business, so now the hucksters are out looking for new fields.
Points to ponder:
If only one person on the planet can do it successfully, is it proven? How about 5 people? 10? Perhaps, but how useful? How many would accept that kind of proof? What if the person/people who can "do" it have some other attribute that accounts for it, but it wasn't discovered or studied?
If it fails to work with 50% of the population, but works with 50% to some significant degree, is it "debunked?" 20/80%? How about if it works only with people who have a certain genetic quirk in their dopamine or seratonin system? Or people who had phonics as a kid instead of some other approach to reading? People who learned to read earlier or later than others? How about gender and the corpus collossum?
In my life, I've read many things in many books and articles, often not being convinced at the time of the claims being made. Since then, I have seen a good many of those phenomena come to pass, at least partially, and occasionally well beyond the initial claim. I have learned to keep an open mind to the possibility, see if the theory makes more sense than the claim or vice versa, try to consider an alternate theory to support the phenomena from another perspective, etc. It's been a fascinating journey.
I used to think past lives were an imaginary metaphor for the SC to communicate with the CM. Then I visited Colonial Williamsburg and sat outside for the fife and drum recital. During the performance, I was transported, for about 3 seconds, to a past life I once had. The images flooded me from nowhere, completely filled me with body awareness, sights, sounds, smells, and emotion tagged to the 3-second moment. At the end of the program, the titles of the pieces played were announced and the title of that particular piece exactly matched my 3 second "visit." It was convincing, and I remain convinced to this day. No proof, just belief. Could have been a mental image projected by one of the musicians, for all I know, but it felt real and it felt all mine. Now that I do believe in past lives, I have access to an open library of volumes of previously learned lessons. Until I embraced that belief in the possibility, the library doors were locked. I was trapped in a realm of metaphor only. Now I have both.
If you believe it cannot work, by all means, don't waste your time on it. If you wish to borrow a belief from someone here, or a link to someone else's belief (offered as proof - one thing I know about psych reseach is that there are way more bogus studies than good ones), it begs a question: Why? Why not remain open to the idea, toy with it, and see what it has to offer you? Sure, you may never read or retain a word according to the method, but what about the other lessons, the ones where you learn something from the inner library or the universal library? What does this question (in your original post) remind you of that you've already been through before? Where is it leading that you resist going, or require assurances in advance of going there?
From the energy generated by the discussion and all the postings made by these many participants, I'd say the journey's already been worth it. I offer all of this in the spirit of growth and expanding our collective knowledge and experience base. I truly hope I have conveyed my ideas in that light, and humbly apologize if I have not.
Namaste!
Greg
Conca said:Ok, I understand that I'm just not willing to sacrifice my time on something unproven, I am interested but only if there is sufficient evidence to prove it is possible.
-
Permalink Reply by Graham Old on -
Hi Conca,
A few years ago, I was a mind-sports geek and even ended up in the World Memory Championships. I think that, along the way, I learned a fair bit of *practical* knowledge of how the brain works. (That is, I could be completely wrong - academically - but I'm confident I can help people use their brains more effectively according to the pragmatic models I use.)
I'm not sure that photoreading works as well, or why, the practitioners claim. However, I've known people increase their reading speeds through the system. I would say that it is not a scam, but it does involve a great deal of hype and marketing. (Hey, we're into hypnotherapy, so we should be used to that!)
If you are asking because you want to be able to read quicker and retain more information, rather than just out of interest, I'd recommend just mastering speed reading. My blog is down at the moment, but you should still be able to read what I wrote on the subject here: http://www.thinkhappy.org/category/speed-reading/
I think I first encountered 'Speed Reading' through Tony Buzan's book of that name. When I started the book I was reading around 300 words per minute, or just under. Now, I've slowed down what I was doing a few years ago and read an average of around 900wpm. It's a skill that I'm really pleased I developed.
My advice, FWIW, is not to waste your time on 'magic' systems that offer super-human results in no time and with no effort, and instead work on developing a proven and practical skill.
Good luck!
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Ellner on -
Hi Kevin,
Your post below is one of the most powerful posts that I have read on HT.com
FYI - I've been there and done that and it used to blow my mind too -- Now, I realize that just about every one in modern life has been subjected to the same social and cultural trances -- We are programed to think small - We are programed to trust experts instead of our common sense and guts. I used to believe that hypnotists would know better, now I recognize we hypnotists have been hypnotized just like every one else. To quote Paul Simon: "When I think of all the crap I learned in High School"
The exciting thing about this thread for me is that people are waking up to the possibilities of the amazing human mind right in front of our eyes...
Thanks for your thoughtful post!
Michael E.
Kevin said:This is mind blow that... a lot of people are now getting into this subject, let alone believing the mind has this capabilities....
I been increasing my speed in which I read for over the past years now, and it never accord to me "Can we really do this"... Yes depending what source of information you read, you will see how much billions of bits of data we take in. My question is...what is a bit of data? Why so much?
Its because everything you see is not what you see...its all light and waveforms, its the fact all this information is being process every frecken second to produce the sounds, the forms, the objects, EVERYTHING... this is what its all about, seeing professionals in the field of the unconscious mind and hypnosis now saying "I agree with this concept, now" is mind blowing to me...
There are people who play with peoples minds every day and they question the capacity of it...that blows my mind...
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Haifleigh on -
Conca,
Take a look at part four of Kim Peek, Man Who Inspired 'Rain Man,' Dies.
Take note of the difference between memorizing and conceptualizing information.
Michael
PS And you may want to watch the first two minutes of the last video piece of that article: "Over 200 boxes worth of books stored on his brain's hard drive ..."
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin on
-
haha Thanks Michael Ellner :D
Trust me, I have a lot more where this one came from!
haha!
Michael Ellner said:Hi Kevin,
Your post below is one of the most powerful posts that I have read on HT.com
FYI - I've been there and done that and it used to blow my mind too -- Now, I realize that just about every one in modern life has been subjected to the same social and cultural trances -- We are programed to think small - We are programed to trust experts instead of our common sense and guts. I used to believe that hypnotists would know better, now I recognize we hypnotists have been hypnotized just like every one else. To quote Paul Simon: "When I think of all the crap I learned in High School"
The exciting thing about this thread for me is that people are waking up to the possibilities of the amazing human mind right in front of our eyes...
Thanks for your thoughtful post!
Michael E.
Kevin said:This is mind blow that... a lot of people are now getting into this subject, let alone believing the mind has this capabilities....
I been increasing my speed in which I read for over the past years now, and it never accord to me "Can we really do this"... Yes depending what source of information you read, you will see how much billions of bits of data we take in. My question is...what is a bit of data? Why so much?
Its because everything you see is not what you see...its all light and waveforms, its the fact all this information is being process every frecken second to produce the sounds, the forms, the objects, EVERYTHING... this is what its all about, seeing professionals in the field of the unconscious mind and hypnosis now saying "I agree with this concept, now" is mind blowing to me...
There are people who play with peoples minds every day and they question the capacity of it...that blows my mind...
-
Permalink Reply by Greg M on
-
Well, these last 4 or 5 posts have certainly been fruitful!
As I read these and recalled an earlier post from further up, I should probably point out that my auto-suggestions were NOT designed to target raising my IQ per se. The 30-point increase was fallout; a byproduct.
The self-hypnosis I did from 1980 to 1985 was to improve memory and retention for materials & vocabulary I had seen or heard in class, or read in textbooks after class. It was to make connections between new and existing knowledge and to see new possibilities between recently learned material and older materials. It was to revisit and re-evaluate old knowledge/beliefs whenever new information challenged it. It was to try and preserve both old and new knowledge on their merits and not replace one with the other. It was to try to see within others' perspectives while developing my own way of thinking about things. I became a better student, a better test-taker, and I'm not nearly as arrogant about knowledge as I used to be. I no longer make proclamations from on high (ok, so I try hard not to) when dealing with people who see things differently than I do, whether "I know I'm right" or not.
Namaste!
G.
-
Permalink Reply by Connor Wyatt on
-
In Nuneaton? That's where I live! Hahaha that's quite a coincidence!
And also that's what I've heard about it so I've decided to leave it. (I might give speed reading a go.)
Conca
Scott Brown said:Hi Conca,
I meet up with a well know mentalist and consultant magican outside a magic shop in Nuneaton. He sumed Photo Reading up in one word: "A load of new age mumbo jumbo market to credulous students". Personally I found Tony Buzans book on speed reading an excellent read and useful in improving my reading speed.
Warmest Regards
Scott
-
Permalink Reply by Connor Wyatt on
-
Yeah that's crazy, where abouts is the magic shop? Was it a while ago it was there?
By the way, Larry Grayson? He sounds familiar, who is he?
Conca
Ian Jay said:Nuneaton, the once home of Larry 'shut that door!' Grayson, and not far from the village that I grew up in - Stoke Golding. A small world .....
Ian
Conca said:In Nuneaton? That's where I live! Hahaha that's quite a coincidence!
And also that's what I've heard about it so I've decided to leave it. (I might give speed reading a go.)
Conca
Scott Brown said:Hi Conca,
I meet up with a well know mentalist and consultant magican outside a magic shop in Nuneaton. He sumed Photo Reading up in one word: "A load of new age mumbo jumbo market to credulous students". Personally I found Tony Buzans book on speed reading an excellent read and useful in improving my reading speed.
Warmest Regards
Scott
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Featured Advertising
Latest Activity
Don commented on Don's blog post 'Spontaneous Orgasms and Hypnosis (Revised)'
Suggestive Celine -"The Queen of, James Hazlerig and 3 other members joined Leshem Yosef's group
Don replied to Lorrie Hale-Ozbey's discussion 'NLP and Human Performance Technology'
Seth-Deborah Roth replied to Steve G. Jones's discussion 'Hypnotherapy Regulation'
Roy Hunter replied to Richard Nongard - NLPBoard.com's discussion 'Informed Consent'
Dennis Atkinson replied to Steve G. Jones's discussion 'Hypnotherapy Regulation'
Roy Hunter replied to Steve G. Jones's discussion 'Hypnotherapy Regulation'
© 2012 Created by Scott Sandland.
About Us
Contact Us
Subscribe To RSS