Talking Point: Instant Inductions and Modern Hypnotic Practice - Gil Boyne in Budapest

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on November 22, 2009 at 2:24pm

Michael,

I applaud your bravery in asking those questions because I'm fairly certain that you had a good idea of what the response would be. As things stand, I also happen to have a great deal of respect and admiration for Gil Boyne, and last year we exchanged signed & warmly inscribed copies of our respective books and had lively email discussions about the only main point in my book upon which we steadfastly disagreed: that, according to my thirteen years of fanatical research (and years of clinical experience), the IMAGE of hypnotism, and especially hypnoTHERAPY, has suffered considerable harm all throughout the past two centuries because of the highly authoritarian techniques employed by the vast majority of practitioners. Indeed, it is no coincidence that the vast majority of both the general public as well as health care professionals have always regarded the phenomenon with a jaundiced eye and a good deal of trepidation.
I used the term "Fear & Loathing" in my book because that captures the zeitgeist perfectly. The spectacle of people being subjected to authoritarian inductions (the "command" approach) has been responsible for relegating hypnosis to little more than carnival side show status until quite recently; and EVEN now many (most?) folks are STILL decidedly wary about it. Of course I'm speaking in purely general terms, because tens of thousands of people consult hypnotherapists these days. But if you consider the fact that it would be of great benefit to hundreds of millions, or even BILLIONS, of people, it's clear that MUCH remains to be done when it comes to enlightening the public AND health care professionals about its potential utility to mankind.
Authoritarian inductions, and especially "instant" inductions are, in my opinion largely responsible for CONTINUING this sorry legacy of "Fear & Loathing". I am NOT talking about their potential "effectiveness" because that is entirely beside the point. I'm talking about the terrible "now I have you in my Power!" IMAGE that such techniques have always fostered, and CONTINUE to foster to this very day!
Anyone interested in reading, entirely for free, several chapters devoted to this very point can do so at my book's website:
www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com.

Saul

P.S. Sorry if some of you object to my selective use of CAPS, but I'm very passionate about this topic, and felt it appropriate to write with the same emphasis as if I were speaking.








Michael Ellner said:

Hello Gil,
I want to thank you and the other participants for making the effort to keep your replies civil - I think it's best that all of us participating in this discussion continue to make that a priority. I certainly will. What a small world -- You developed your instant induction after reading the Russian physiologist Platnov's masterpiece: The Word as a Physiologic and Therapeutic Factor" and I based my guided self-help approach based on the Platnovian theory that six or so sessions of hypnotic "rest" without any interference from the hypnotist, would produce healing in and of itself-- in addition to considerable research into the deleterious effects of chronic stress, and my personal experience with the benefits of daily hypno-meditative practice. Any technique that you endorse will be very effective -- and there is a trickle down effect - because it's you - your students and their students and their students would all use it and teach it effectively --


That is true of all great teachers, and I was in no way, shape or form trying to suggest that "My way is better than yours" You and I both know the Master empowers the techniques that his students are using, and all I was saying is: “Hey - Look out your window -- the world has changed a lot in the last 25 years and those changes are reflected in current therapeutic theories and practice” -- You could lead the revolution in changing our practices by simply acknowledging and acting on the new environment in which we are working because any technique that you endorse and teach will be very effective.

Dear Readers,

When I posted my three questions - I understood that I was risking Gil Boyne's wrath and the rage from those might feel that I was attacking him. You can be sure that I was very aware that Gil is a huge fish in our little metaphorical pond and I knew he is loved and admired by his students and colleagues. I truly honor and respect Gil.

I didn't and don't appreciate SteveH's projection of my motivations but if that's what you think Steve-- that's what you think.

If you review the thread - I am confident that I did not question Gil's integrity or his heart and I did not question his two demonstrations in terms of their effectiveness as hypnotic tools. There is no doubt - that Gil is a very effective practitioner.

I was questioning the impact of Gil's demonstrations in regard to their effect on making our profession acceptable to the mainstream of the uninitiated potential client population, and also to potential referring licensed health care professionals, because I believed that every certified hypnosis professional on HT.com is interested in “mainstreaming” our profession and practices. That was my sole motivation.

Dear Dave, Kelley, Roy, Hugh, Kevin, et al,

I am sorry to point out that Certified hypnotists like ourselves are not really part of (or are a very small part of) the "official" world of Science and Medicine. Any one researching this will quickly discover that all of the luminaries in our "Shadow World" are rarely if ever mentioned in the "Official"- Medical and Science History of Hypnosis. Dr Erickson distinguished himself because his contributions to hypnosis took place within the "REAL" world of science, medicine and mental health and Dave Elman and Charlie Tebbetts did not operate in those waters.

I have been breaking out of the Shadow World since in mid-1980s and I have a great deal of experience in mainstreaming Alternative Medicine. I have put lots of energy and time in helping mainstream your practices as well, even if you were not aware of my efforts. From 1988 through 1992 I was an active member of a National Institutes of Health's - Community Research Initiative on Mainstreaming Alternative Therapies for AIDS. I was a Keynote speaker on Hypnosis and Surviving AIDS at a major International AIDS conference in Amsterdam in 1992. In 1993, I was a panelist on the NIH's forum on Alternative Medicine, Wellness and Health Care Reform sponsored by Office of Alternative Medicine. In 1996 I was a ghost writer/editor for the international best seller: "Alternative Medicine: The Definitive Guide." Between starting my practice in 1980 and today I have maintained my private hypnosis practice in the offices of some the best-known traditional, non-conventional and conventional alternative medical centers in the US. I have parlayed those experiences into writing several columns for a trade journal that introduced certified hypnosis professionals to tens of thousands of Hospital CEOs. Hospital Administrators and Medical Directors of Hospitals. I used those columns, and recommendations from dozens of licensed health care providers endorsing my approach to hypnotic pain relief, to earn a chance to teach hypnotic theory and techniques at a major medical conference on a trial basis in 2007. This teaching opportunity resulted in the participants earning medical CMEs. My associate Dan Cleary and I were a big hit and we were able to add 3 additional courses taught by HT.com members Scott Sandland, Nadine Roman and Sue Hull in the 2008 conference. We got great reviews in 2008 as well, but the economy went south and the organizers of the conference cut back on the programs they were willing to subsidize and just Dan and I were invited back to teach in 2009. Dan and I were the buzz of the 2009 conference and we have been green-lighted to propose expanded offerings for 2010. Not bad, for two certified hypnosis professionals who are not licensed health care providers. Moreover, the physicians who left our presentations enthusiastic about the possibility of working with a certified hypnotist are coming back to your neighborhood looking for someone they can work with. Just to be clear, this explanation is not about “me” but about what can be done to advance the cause of mainstreaming our profession.

In terms of my accomplishment in the world of hypnosis beyond our little pond -- a 1997 European Union Commission Project Report on Alternative Medicine for AIDS named me one of the World's leading experts in mind/body approaches for helping people with AIDS. I am also the co-author of a guided self-hypnosis program for people with IBS that was endorsed by the American Academy of Pain Management and I am the co-author of a peer-reviewed article that makes a strong case for adding certified hypnosis practitioners to the Workers' Compensation system that will be published in Dec. 2009 in a peer reviewed journal devoted to the Worker's Compensation field. I have also done quite well for myself within our Shadow World -- Having won top honors as a hypnosis/NLP educator and practitioner from the NGH, IMDHA, IACT, IHF and NFNLP. To sum up -- I have introduced the merits of using certified hypnosis practitioners to tens of thousands of licensed health care professionals and I know a thing or two about mainstreaming hypnosis and mind-body healing. Again, my point is that the efforts of someone with Gil’s stature to “mainstream” our profession could be very effective, and of benefit to us all.

Again - I did not criticize Gil's effectiveness as a practitioner and/or as teacher -- I did, and do not, question Gil's heart or integrity -My concern was and is that just being effective is not enough to take our rightful places within the “System”. Certified hypnosis practitioners have been effectively helping their clients for several decades and we are still on the outside looking in --

In closing, like it or not the world of Science and Medicine has moved away from Doctor/Therapist Centered and Regressive and Abreactive Approaches, and the new models for quality health care is Patient/Client Centered Approaches and Cognitive Behavioral therapies (at least according to the US Institute of Medicine, which is the GOD of Scientific Medicine and the National Survey of Psychotherapy Training in Psychiatry, Psychology, and Social Work respectfully (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63:925-934))

Roy and others pointed out that there are many ways to be effective -- I agree and my point was we are not Authorized Health Care Providers -- We are currently perceived as 2nd class practitioners, and if our collective goal is to take our rightful place within the established Health Care establishment - BEING EFFECTIVE IS NOT ENOUGH! Our theories and practice must be compatible with modern thinking and practices - No offense is intended – this is just a fact of life if we want to spread the benefits of our profession to a wider audience.

I put myself out there and called it like I saw it by the heinous act of asking 3 questions that could have helped our profession and your practices -- I will think long and hard before doing that again, because it appears that a vocal minority would rather vociferously defend their established routine than consider acknowledging the larger picture. Are we so certain of our individual approaches that, unlike what we preach to our clients, we can no longer be open to growth, development and change?


Have a great day or night-

Respectfully,


Michael E.


"He who dares not offend cannot be honest"
- Thomas Paine

Permalink Reply by David Parke on November 22, 2009 at 2:49pm

Michael,

I don't believe that asking questions intended to help a community can be considered heinous in any way, shape or form. I do feel, however, that the questions were loaded and emotionally charged which may have been the reason people reacted strongly...not merely because they were defending their own techniques. For myself, I have and will continue to study under every established person that I can, including you when I have the opportunity.

I agree with Kevin and Hugh about being accepted by the establishment. If I wanted to be a psychologist or psychotherapist I'd go to school for it...it's that simple. The thing I love about hypnosis is the "artistic" qualities that it encompasses. I know that you feel that being "effective" isn't enough but at the end of the day being effective will be enough for the client...and that is who we serve. It is said that we can't serve two masters and we, as a community, are faced with serving the client or serving some regulatory body that dictates what is right or wrong regardless of its effectiveness. We see this today in the modern practice of psychiatry where a reliance on drugs has become the accepted norm.

Thank you for posting your accomplishments and associations. I have heard many great things about you but was unaware of much that you have done.

I have a question. Is this meant to be more of a discussion about abreactive vs. cognitive-style therapies? If so, then I'd very much like to hear what people have to say. It is my understanding (limited though it is) that Gil's techniques, while using regression and a certain amount of abreaction, also include a good amount of cognitive elements. If cognitive therapy includes identifying distorted thinking and changing emotional responses then wouldn't discovering an ISE and reinforcing events lead down a path of cognition? What I'm curious to know is how and where does your style and Gil's style intersect. Outside of rapid inductions, using touch, and being directive do your two paths share common ground?

Dave

Michael Ellner said:

Hello Gil,
I want to thank you and the other participants for making the effort to keep your replies civil - I think it's best that all of us participating in this discussion continue to make that a priority. I certainly will.
What a small world -- You developed your instant induction after reading the Russian physiologist Platnov's masterpiece: The Word as a Physiologic and Therapeutic Factor" and I based my guided self-help approach based on the Platnovian theory that six or so sessions of hypnotic "rest" without any interference from the hypnotist, would produce healing in and of itself-- in addition to considerable research into the deleterious effects of chronic stress, and my personal experience with the benefits of daily hypno-meditative practice.

Any technique that you endorse will be very effective -- and there is a trickle down effect - because it's you - your students and their students and their students would all use it and teach it effectively --


That is true of all great teachers, and I was in no way, shape or form trying to suggest that "My way is better than yours" You and I both know the Master empowers the techniques that his students are using, and all I was saying is: “Hey - Look out your window -- the world has changed a lot in the last 25 years and those changes are reflected in current therapeutic theories and practice” -- You could lead the revolution in changing our practices by simply acknowledging and acting on the new environment in which we are working because any technique that you endorse and teach will be very effective.

Dear Readers,

When I posted my three questions - I understood that I was risking Gil Boyne's wrath and the rage from those might feel that I was attacking him. You can be sure that I was very aware that Gil is a huge fish in our little metaphorical pond and I knew he is loved and admired by his students and colleagues. I truly honor and respect Gil.

I didn't and don't appreciate SteveH's projection of my motivations but if that's what you think Steve-- that's what you think.

If you review the thread - I am confident that I did not question Gil's integrity or his heart and I did not question his two demonstrations in terms of their effectiveness as hypnotic tools. There is no doubt - that Gil is a very effective practitioner.

I was questioning the impact of Gil's demonstrations in regard to their effect on making our profession acceptable to the mainstream of the uninitiated potential client population, and also to potential referring licensed health care professionals, because I believed that every certified hypnosis professional on HT.com is interested in “mainstreaming” our profession and practices. That was my sole motivation.

Dear Dave, Kelley, Roy, Hugh, Kevin, et al,

I am sorry to point out that Certified hypnotists like ourselves are not really part of (or are a very small part of) the "official" world of Science and Medicine. Any one researching this will quickly discover that all of the luminaries in our "Shadow World" are rarely if ever mentioned in the "Official"- Medical and Science History of Hypnosis. Dr Erickson distinguished himself because his contributions to hypnosis took place within the "REAL" world of science, medicine and mental health and Dave Elman and Charlie Tebbetts did not operate in those waters.

I have been breaking out of the Shadow World since in mid-1980s and I have a great deal of experience in mainstreaming Alternative Medicine. I have put lots of energy and time in helping mainstream your practices as well, even if you were not aware of my efforts. From 1988 through 1992 I was an active member of a National Institutes of Health's - Community Research Initiative on Mainstreaming Alternative Therapies for AIDS. I was a Keynote speaker on Hypnosis and Surviving AIDS at a major International AIDS conference in Amsterdam in 1992. In 1993, I was a panelist on the NIH's forum on Alternative Medicine, Wellness and Health Care Reform sponsored by Office of Alternative Medicine. In 1996 I was a ghost writer/editor for the international best seller: "Alternative Medicine: The Definitive Guide." Between starting my practice in 1980 and today I have maintained my private hypnosis practice in the offices of some the best-known traditional, non-conventional and conventional alternative medical centers in the US. I have parlayed those experiences into writing several columns for a trade journal that introduced certified hypnosis professionals to tens of thousands of Hospital CEOs. Hospital Administrators and Medical Directors of Hospitals. I used those columns, and recommendations from dozens of licensed health care providers endorsing my approach to hypnotic pain relief, to earn a chance to teach hypnotic theory and techniques at a major medical conference on a trial basis in 2007. This teaching opportunity resulted in the participants earning medical CMEs. My associate Dan Cleary and I were a big hit and we were able to add 3 additional courses taught by HT.com members Scott Sandland, Nadine Roman and Sue Hull in the 2008 conference. We got great reviews in 2008 as well, but the economy went south and the organizers of the conference cut back on the programs they were willing to subsidize and just Dan and I were invited back to teach in 2009. Dan and I were the buzz of the 2009 conference and we have been green-lighted to propose expanded offerings for 2010. Not bad, for two certified hypnosis professionals who are not licensed health care providers. Moreover, the physicians who left our presentations enthusiastic about the possibility of working with a certified hypnotist are coming back to your neighborhood looking for someone they can work with. Just to be clear, this explanation is not about “me” but about what can be done to advance the cause of mainstreaming our profession.

In terms of my accomplishment in the world of hypnosis beyond our little pond -- a 1997 European Union Commission Project Report on Alternative Medicine for AIDS named me one of the World's leading experts in mind/body approaches for helping people with AIDS. I am also the co-author of a guided self-hypnosis program for people with IBS that was endorsed by the American Academy of Pain Management and I am the co-author of a peer-reviewed article that makes a strong case for adding certified hypnosis practitioners to the Workers' Compensation system that will be published in Dec. 2009 in a peer reviewed journal devoted to the Worker's Compensation field. I have also done quite well for myself within our Shadow World -- Having won top honors as a hypnosis/NLP educator and practitioner from the NGH, IMDHA, IACT, IHF and NFNLP. To sum up -- I have introduced the merits of using certified hypnosis practitioners to tens of thousands of licensed health care professionals and I know a thing or two about mainstreaming hypnosis and mind-body healing. Again, my point is that the efforts of someone with Gil’s stature to “mainstream” our profession could be very effective, and of benefit to us all.

Again - I did not criticize Gil's effectiveness as a practitioner and/or as teacher -- I did, and do not, question Gil's heart or integrity -My concern was and is that just being effective is not enough to take our rightful places within the “System”. Certified hypnosis practitioners have been effectively helping their clients for several decades and we are still on the outside looking in --

In closing, like it or not the world of Science and Medicine has moved away from Doctor/Therapist Centered and Regressive and Abreactive Approaches, and the new models for quality health care is Patient/Client Centered Approaches and Cognitive Behavioral therapies (at least according to the US Institute of Medicine, which is the GOD of Scientific Medicine and the National Survey of Psychotherapy Training in Psychiatry, Psychology, and Social Work respectfully (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63:925-934))

Roy and others pointed out that there are many ways to be effective -- I agree and my point was we are not Authorized Health Care Providers -- We are currently perceived as 2nd class practitioners, and if our collective goal is to take our rightful place within the established Health Care establishment - BEING EFFECTIVE IS NOT ENOUGH! Our theories and practice must be compatible with modern thinking and practices - No offense is intended – this is just a fact of life if we want to spread the benefits of our profession to a wider audience.

I put myself out there and called it like I saw it by the heinous act of asking 3 questions that could have helped our profession and your practices -- I will think long and hard before doing that again, because it appears that a vocal minority would rather vociferously defend their established routine than consider acknowledging the larger picture. Are we so certain of our individual approaches that, unlike what we preach to our clients, we can no longer be open to growth, development and change?


Have a great day or night-

Respectfully,


Michael E.


"He who dares not offend cannot be honest"
- Thomas Paine

Permalink Reply by Michael Ellner on November 22, 2009 at 7:19pm

Hi Dave,

I suggest starting a new discussion - "Comparing abreactive vs. cognitive-style therapies."

I'd be happy to respectfully share my opinions.

Do you want to start it?



Dave Parke said:

Michael,

I have a question. Is this meant to be more of a discussion about abreactive vs. cognitive-style therapies? If so, then I'd very much like to hear what people have to say. It is my understanding (limited though it is) that Gil's techniques, while using regression and a certain amount of abreaction, also include a good amount of cognitive elements. If cognitive therapy includes identifying distorted thinking and changing emotional responses then wouldn't discovering an ISE and reinforcing events lead down a path of cognition? What I'm curious to know is how and where does your style and Gil's style intersect. Outside of rapid inductions, using touch, and being directive do your two paths share common ground?

Dave

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 23, 2009 at 1:33am

Dave said'I I agree with Kevin and Hugh about being accepted by the establishment. If I wanted to be a psychologist or psychotherapist I'd go to school for it...it's that simple.that it encompasses. I know that you feel that being "effective" isn't enough but at the end of the day being effective will be enough for the client...and that is who we serve. It is said that we can't serve two masters and we, as a community, are faced with serving the client or serving some regulatory body that dictates what is right or wrong regardless of its effectiveness. We see this today in the modern practice of psychiatry where a reliance on drugs has become the accepted norm. The thing I love about hypnosis is the "artistic" qualities

Gil Responds----Hello Dave, In 1964, the Calif. legislature passed a bill that stated that everyone who was engaged in counseling or "practical psychology" as it was known then, must register and declare their intent to enroll in a Calif. university and take prescribed courses to total 3,000 classroom hours, then serve a one year junior internship and finally a senior internship then apply for licensing as a psychologist. I did not register then because I do not wish to be a psychologist or university trained psychotherapist.I have served internships of MY choice at Dr. Everett Shostrom's (Professor and head of the Psychology Dept. at the University of Calif., Irvine) Institute of TherapeuticPsychology ( 55-8hr.resident days) and 25 resident days with Dr. Fritz Perls, founder of Gestalt Therapy. These trainings were helpful but the main benefit to me was to help me see more clearly that the practice of psychotherapy was not for me. While I have incorporated some of Dr. Perl's Gestalt techniques into my work, I am not a Gestaltist! I declare proudly, " I am a hypnotherapist"----------------------
PS To discover the differences, consult the "Federal Dictionary of Occupational Titles" . blockquote>

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 23, 2009 at 1:59am

Hello Saul, Several months ago, you wrote me to say that after thirteen years of research and great expense in self-publishing, you had only sold thirteen copies of your book. I am disclosing my review of your book (which you requested) since it was created for public usage.

Saul, Thank you for the copy of your book.
I have read it and since you asked for my comments, here they are. I think you did a great job of research although very selective and critical of the early pioneers and their discoveries. We stand on their shoulders and we built on their mistaken theories.
I think that the parts on the unreal quality of the abstract definitions that are used to explain and define hypnosis are real gifts to the reader. But, I strongly disagree with your vendetta against stage hypnosis and your belief in its' negative effect on the perception of the general public. I began my career in 1954, and there were very few (if any) working stage hypnotists. Yet, the most often heard objections to hypnosis from most people as follows; [i]"Hypnosis--oh that's dangerous! Hypnosis is against my religion! Oh no, I'm not letting anyone control my mind!"[/i] These objections are rarely heard today.
Today there are thousands of stage hypnotists, each performing 200 to 300 shows each year .Everyone who buys a ticket to these shows knows what to expect and those who volunteer are willing, eager and expectant. They expect to do foolish stunts in an exhibitionistic way. They are not innocent victims of an egotistic and insensitive hypnotist.
Public perception has never been more positive and hypnotherapists have never been busier. Both stage hypnotism and clinical hypnotherapy practice are doing very well, thank you. My personal experience is that whenever a stage hypnotist has performed in my city, the shows create many new clients for me and my colleagues.
For those who are interested in research into the early, lesser known pioneer personalities and the evolution of this profession as well as the true book collectors, I can recommend this book for your library.

cite>Saul Rosenfeld said:

Michael,

I applaud your bravery in asking those questions because I'm fairly certain that you had a good idea of what the response would be. As things stand, I also happen to have a great deal of respect and admiration for Gil Boyne, and last year we exchanged signed & warmly inscribed copies of our respective books and had lively email discussions about the only main point in my book upon which we steadfastly disagreed: that, according to my thirteen years of fanatical research (and years of clinical experience), the IMAGE of hypnotism, and especially hypnoTHERAPY, has suffered considerable harm all throughout the past two centuries because of the highly authoritarian techniques employed by the vast majority of practitioners. Indeed, it is no coincidence that the vast majority of both the general public as well as health care professionals have always regarded the phenomenon with a jaundiced eye and a good deal of trepidation.
I used the term "Fear & Loathing" in my book because that captures the zeitgeist perfectly. The spectacle of people being subjected to authoritarian inductions (the "command" approach) has been responsible for relegating hypnosis to little more than carnival side show status until quite recently; and EVEN now many (most?) folks are STILL decidedly wary about it. Of course I'm speaking in purely general terms, because tens of thousands of people consult hypnotherapists these days. But if you consider the fact that it would be of great benefit to hundreds of millions, or even BILLIONS, of people, it's clear that MUCH remains to be done when it comes to enlightening the public AND health care professionals about its potential utility to mankind.
Authoritarian inductions, and especially "instant" inductions are, in my opinion largely responsible for CONTINUING this sorry legacy of "Fear & Loathing". I am NOT talking about their potential "effectiveness" because that is entirely beside the point. I'm talking about the terrible "now I have you in my Power!" IMAGE that such techniques have always fostered, and CONTINUE to foster to this very day!
Anyone interested in reading, entirely for free, several chapters devoted to this very point can do so at my book's website:

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on November 23, 2009 at 6:58am

Hello Gil,

I appreciate your saying that "the parts of my book on the unreal quality of the abstract definitions that are used to explain and define hypnosis are real gifts to the reader", because those chapters comprise the majority of my book. As I replied to your last email several months ago (when you told me that you decided that there was more good informative material in my book that offset our disagreements about my negative views regarding stage hypnosis, and asked my permission to quote excerpts- which I gladly gave):

"I'm very pleased to hear that you decided there is more good informative material in my book than points of disagreement; because as far as I can tell, the only points of contention
between us stem from my opinion that (patently crude and thoughtless) displays of stage-hypnosis and/or public exhibitions of sensationalistic "instant"-induction techniques are counterproductive to its image as a force for healing. Aside from that, I believe that we are more or less "on the same page" regarding every other aspect of the phenomenon; and we are definitely both seriously concerned with properly educating the new generation of practitioners, and promoting the use of intelligent hypnotherapy so that its vast potential to aid mankind is not relegated to hucksters and charlatans, and thus squandered away for yet another two hundred years!"

But the fact remains that we "strongly disagree" with each other when it concerns the terrible IMAGE of hypnosis that is still held by most people today as a result of their exposure to public displays of highly authoritarian and/or "instant" inductions, and of course the crude and often highly insulting routines of FAR too many stage hypnotists.
As far as that goes, I hope you won't mind if I cut & paste part of one of my replies to a email you sent me a while back, because that will save me the trouble of basically re-writing it in response to your latest post on this thread:

"Dear Gil,

I hope you're not taking any of my book's commentary about the "image problem" personally,
because that would be entirely unwarranted! Yet, I can't help thinking that you feel I'm not being objective enough when it concerns the effect that public displays of highly authoritarian inductions have always had on the public's perception.
I don't know how far you've gotten yet in my book, but you'll see that I have provided documented proof that such negative perceptions are not, unfortunately, confined to the past- but are still in force today (though admittedly to a lesser degree). In fact, two of my own acquaintances both told me that they disagreed with my statement about its all too often still being regarded with "Fear & Loathing"; and both professed that they, and their friends, did not regard hypnosis as something to be feared or wary of.
However, when I then pointedly asked them if they would want to be hypnotized themselves- they both replied (rather awkwardly and slightly embarrassed!) in the negative, and then sheepishly admitted
that perhaps they did harbor an unrecognized prejudice against hypnotists!
Needless to say, all those folks who attend your workshops and seminars are considerably more open to the prospect of being hypnotized- otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place; but I doubt very much if they are a true representative sampling of "general" attitudes held by (many? most?) of the public and, especially, health-care practitioners- who still know little or nothing about it, and usually do not announce a desire to learn more lest they be mocked by their colleagues.
No, as far as general attitudes go- I firmly believe (from both my considerable research, as well as personal experience) that the vast majority of people still regard hypnosis with a jaundiced eye.
Many are willing to try it of course, but many many more are not. And there is a direct cause and effect between this negative attitude, and the public display of highly authoritarian inductions on "youtube", etc. (not to mention the disgraceful and/or ludicrous antics encouraged by many stage hypnotists!), and the often-sensationalistic coverage by the media (e.g., the way it has always been, and still is portrayed in almost every single movie, cartoon, and tv series).
I am certainly not blaming anyone personally for this sorry state of afairs (such as Ormond McGill), because that's the way everybody practiced hypnosis! As far as I was aware, Milton Erickson was the only one to have popularized a "permissive" approach towards induction- everyone else I ever came across was either practicing in an authoritarian, or in a "standardized" (experimentalist) manner.
I don't think it was "unfair" of me to quote from McGill's 60 year-old book, because regardless of the fact that he was a kind and gentle man whom everybody loved, those antics being taught in his book to stage hypnotists (and which are still being taught to a new crop in the modern reprint!) were at least partly responsible for the fact that many (most?) of the audience members who witnessed those exhibitions would not dream of going to a clinical hypnotist for therapy; because they came away from such exhibitions both awed and frightened by the illusion of Total Power they'd witnessed.
Do I believe that this was Ormond McGill's intention? Of course not! But that most certainly turned out to be the result of attending such performances."

Now, while I agree with you that "public perception has never been more positive and hypnotherapists have never been busier", I feel that this development represents but a TINY FRACTION of its FULL potential. As I said in my original post, tens of thousands of people may well go to hypnotherapists these days, but even this seemingly positive statistic is misleading, because that number should be measured in the tens of MILLIONS, in the HUNDREDS of millions. And what is preventing this widespread universal acceptance in 2010 is still basically the same old attitude of wariness and trepidation that people felt back in 1910, and in 1810- it is the fear of being CONTROLLED by the hypnotist, the fear of having their "will" DOMINATED by another. And nothing perpetuates this fear like PUBLIC displays of highly AUTHORITARIAN inductions.
I do not, nor have I ever, contested their "effectiveness"- but I'm firmly convinced that the use of such techniques should be strictly confined to PRIVATE sessions exclusively in order to prevent the continued propagation of the age-old "now I have you in my Power!!" IMAGE that has been SO harmful and SO counterproductive to hypnotism for the past two centuries (and counting...).

Saul

P.S. Needless to say, my book has now sold considerably more copies that I reported back then- although sales are still rather disappointing. However, the problem does NOT lie with the book itself, but rather with the unfortunate fact that I have no means to promote it seeing as how I choose not to be affiliated with any organization, institute or "school", and am also unwilling to go on the "lecture circuit" or personally promote it in any fashion. This is my choice, and makes things considerably more difficult when it comes to getting the word out; but if you take a few moments to read the absolutely STELLAR reviews and testimonials from a goodly number of well respected and highly influential professionals that appear on my website, you'll see that the slow pace of sales is most assuredly not a reflection of its value to the profession

Permalink Reply by Michael Ellner on November 23, 2009 at 7:41am

I hate the idea of being a "the fact is" kind of poster, but, one would be hard pressed to consult the DOT as it has been replaced by the O*NET/SOC (Standard Occupational Classification System). There is no specific SOC occupation with the title of Hypnotherapist.

GIL BOYNE said:

PS To discover the differences, consult the "Federal Dictionary of Occupational Titles" .

Permalink Reply by Hugh Cole on November 23, 2009 at 7:48am

Why is it that some people look at the "Now I have you in my power and your gonna cluck like a chicken" thing and wring thier hands and rip thier clothes, throw dust on thier heads and lament the terrible image people have of evil bug eyed hypnotists and begin a personal vendetta to stamp out such extremely basic parts to human nature (along with the evil bug eyed hypnotists)? ... instead of just simply playing the ball where it lies.

Others listen to that stuff and laugh ... say "that's not how it works .... Here let me show you" ... and walk off with a new client. Could it be that the world views are ... differant .... Core values ... Differant. I have often said that a good hypnotist is like a good poker player.. he plays the cards he is dealt .. Not the cards he wishes he was dealt.

Let me point something out to you... Media folk have made those movies for a long long time. Svengali is not an unknown book It's actually pretty widly read in it's time. and even now WHY Nobody was forcing folks to watch those movies or read the books. They did that because they WANTED to. There is a very fundemental part of human nature that is fascinated by that behavior ..by the possibility they don't have to be completely responsible for thier own behavior. More than you might imagine actually get a bit of a rush at that thought. People only "fear" what they believe to "be possible". Who was that that taught me that "all hynosis is Self Hypnosis"?
Ok so I had someone working with me a while back on a public relations thing I was doing. Great lady. She took great pains to tell me why I shouldn't be using swinging watches and that sorta stuff in my campaign. She told me that as a client it would bring up images of Power Driven bug eyed hypnotists etc etc. She knew that for a fact because that's what she used to believe. (The words cluck like a chicken even entered the conversation) Of course she had been through hypnotherapy, was very familiar with it and was even asking me about the possibility of "trading services". The obvious question.. What changed your mind?" Well ... The answer ... She met a very competent hypnotist on the left coast. He did the unthinkable and explained to her how it worked and even let her EXPERIENCE IT. danged if it didn't work.. and now she is a walking billboard for the possibilities of Hypnosis. Enough said for me.

Hugh Cole
The Pretty Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

Permalink Reply by Michael Ellner on November 23, 2009 at 7:55am

Dear Gil,

I respect and honor you and your achievements - period.

Michael Ellner

Dear HT.com Brothers and Sisters-
This is NOT a threat -- I will be starting another discussion on questioning the widely held belief that the mind/brain does not see or hear and process "negatives" in the not too distance future. =^..^=

Hint- Millions of NYers walk around in a wide range of very mild to extreme trances and seem to get "Don't Walk" without walking into traffic. Brain scan research suggests the brain acts on negative messages faster than on positive messages.

Meanwhile - I'm thinking it might be time to put this baby to bed and start another discussion -- I am going to keep this one open through Tuesday in case people who were off-line over the weekend want to respectfully share.

And I am going to start another discussion as soon as I post this reply.

Do You Want To Mainstream Your Practice and Can It Be Done Without Government Regulation or Compromising Our Effectiveness? I say Yes!

Please feel free to join me there-

Ciao for now-

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on November 23, 2009 at 8:31am

Hugh,

Are you saying that rather than lamenting the cold hard fact that hypnosis has been a pitiful case study of LOST POTENTIAL for more than two centuries (because the public has a totally misguided perception of the phenomenon from constant exposure to the "now I have you in my Power!!" image deliberately fostered by public exhibitions of authoritarian tactics), that I should simply "play the ball where it lies" and try to convince people ONE by ONE on a personal level instead of attempting to expose this terrible injustice in a fact-filled book designed to reach a large number of people at the same time?
If so, then I can only say that trying to counter these universal misconceptions your way (one by one) would literally take FOREVER.

What's more, I really couldn't care LESS that some people "actually get a bit of a rush" by highly charged ultra authoritarian stage exhibitions (with or without the often-obligatory "cluck like a chicken!" routine). What I DO care about, and passionately so, is trying to make people realize that the ENORMOUS potential for HEALING that hypnosis has should FAR outweigh its ability to provide cheap AMUSEMENT in a "stage" exhibition for the purpose of "entertainment".

"Play the ball where it lies"? Not if I can help it...!!!

Saul

Hugh Cole said:

Why is it that some people look at the "Now I have you in my power and your gonna cluck like a chicken" thing and wring thier hands and rip thier clothes, throw dust on thier heads and lament the terrible image people have of evil bug eyed hypnotists and begin a personal vendetta to stamp out such extremely basic parts to human nature (along with the evil bug eyed hypnotists)? ... instead of just simply playing the ball where it lies.
Others listen to that stuff and laugh ... say "that's not how it works .... Here let me show you" ... and walk off with a new client. Could it be that the world views are ... differant .... Core values ... Differant. I have often said that a good hypnotist is like a good poker player.. he plays the cards he is dealt .. Not the cards he wishes he was dealt. Let me point something out to you... Media folk have made those movies for a long long time. Svengali is not an unknown book It's actually pretty widly read in it's time. and even now WHY Nobody was forcing folks to watch those movies or read the books. They did that because they WANTED to. There is a very fundemental part of human nature that is fascinated by that behavior ..by the possibility they don't have to be completely responsible for thier own behavior. More than you might imagine actually get a bit of a rush at that thought. People only "fear" what they believe to "be possible". Who was that that taught me that "all hynosis is Self Hypnosis"? Ok so I had someone working with me a while back on a public relations thing I was doing. Great lady. She took great pains to tell me why I shouldn't be using swinging watches and that sorta stuff in my campaign. She told me that as a client it would bring up images of Power Driven bug eyed hypnotists etc etc. She knew that for a fact because that's what she used to believe. (The words cluck like a chicken even entered the conversation) Of course she had been through hypnotherapy, was very familiar with it and was even asking me about the possibility of "trading services". The obvious question.. What changed your mind?" Well ... The answer ... She met a very competent hypnotist on the left coast. He did the unthinkable and explained to her how it worked and even let her EXPERIENCE IT. danged if it didn't work.. and now she is a walking billboard for the possibilities of Hypnosis. Enough said for me.
Hugh Cole
The Pretty Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

Permalink Reply by Hugh Cole on November 23, 2009 at 9:19am

I like this discussion because it it is filled with passionate professionals all with very good and sensible ways of doing things.

No Saul ... I am not suggessting that you do that ... i am suggesting that I will continue to do that, while you do whatever you feel you need to do to "to make people realize that the ENORMOUS potential for HEALING that hypnosis has". Thats a worthwhile goal and I applaud it. But Please don't assume that the reason they don't know that already has to do with Two centuries of tawdry stage shows and instant inductions. Perhaps they don't know it because they never experienced it.

I am also suggesting that Two Centuries of lost potential is just that .. Lost Potential. (Wouldn't life be great if Adolf Hitler was more like Gandi, and antibiotics were available before the bubonic plague) I teach my trance partners that the past is over ... the future is really the past that hasn't happened yet and all we have are these precious here and now moments to make a differance, Why waste them worrying about Lost potential? So .. I muddle through one life changing event at a time and I really don't think much about what othere may be doing to make hypnosis more widely accepted.

I am happy you are writing a book to expose the cheap and tawdry bug eyed stage hypnotists. and making the public happy about Hypnosis by bringing up all the worst examples you can think off. Let me know how that works out for you.
In the meantime I will do what I can to make life better for the folks around me.

Hugh Cole
The Pretty Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet.

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 23, 2009 at 9:50am

Hello Saul, One of the most moving and inspiring yet pitiful characters in Literature is Don Quixote. A man who spends his life "Tilting at Windmills! ---because of his mania-----------Gil Boyne.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• …
• 9
• Next ›
• Page