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

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Fable Goodman on November 23, 2009 at 10:22am

Touche Gil!,


I am still very much enjoying this thread,
despite (predicatble) attempts to hijack it to promote a book.

P.S. My own latest book will be on sale soon...
be sure to watch this thread for more details..
I once had an email exchange with a world famous hypnotist,
who amongst other things...
said something nice about my book.

I have kept the emails to prove it.
Just in case anyone ever doubts that I am good writer.

pleese reed the buk what I rote.

LOve and humble hugs,

Fable

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on November 23, 2009 at 11:05am

Hugh,

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"

George Santayana, 1905


Rather than expressing doubt (with a touch of thinly-veiled sarcasm at the end no less!) about my contention that the terrible IMAGE surrounding hypnotism has been the DIRECT result of public exhibitions of highly authoritarian tactics, why don't you first at LEAST try reading those free (yes, FREE) chapters on my book's website before being so dismissive in a reflexive knee-jerk reaction to hearing something you don't like?

Saul

www.HistoryOfHypnotism.com





Hugh Cole said:

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 Saul Rosenfeld on November 23, 2009 at 11:13am

Hello Gil,

You are absolutely correct about that (LOL!); but I would regard it as a stupendous badge of HONOR to be remembered one day as having been a "moving and inspiring yet pitiful" character like Don Quixote.
After all, the guy (fictitious character though he was) ultimately achieved nothing less than IMMORTALITY...!!!
; - )
As always, with respect, admiration and fondness,

Saul





GIL BOYNE said:

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.

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on November 23, 2009 at 7:25pm

Michael,

Could you please keep this thread alive rather than deleting it, as I feel that it deals with a very important subject matter that could (should!!) be of GREAT benefit to the members of this Forum. I'm fairly confident that a number of others probably feel the same way.
Thanks!

Saul



Michael Ellner said:

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 Hugh Cole on November 23, 2009 at 9:26pm

Saul,
Micheal is not talking about deleting the thread. He actually cannot.do that. He is beginning another one to focus on the real issue he wanted to discuss. That I think is a marvelous idea because Micheal does have some important issues which may have gotten lost in the specificity of his referances to Gil. This Thread is Marvelous and despite some of the underlying clashes contains a wealth of great information and dialogue.
As you are fairly new to Hypnothoughts, let me also say that Hypnothoughts is a totally open forum for the free and unbiased expression of thoughts and ideas.about Hypnosis. Some discussions, like this one become heated because let's face it. We are ALL passionate about what we do and how we do it. ,,, and since what we do is NOT an exact science ... our thoughts and ideas and theories and observations are all qualatative and subjective, One of the great things about hypnothoughts is that ALL "camps" and ideas are welcome. without recrimination to share ideas. and to grow from them.
My reaction to you is strong, as is Gil's because let's face it both Gil and I see value in public demonstration hypnosis because we do it quite effectively. You are not the first person to come along with a blanket condemnation of all stage Hypnosis practices and you certainly won't be the last. Our reaction is strong because we have been here before and we know where this goes,and particularly here in the United States, you won't find much support for increased regulation and criminalization of "folks that don't do it your way". Regulatory spirals lead inward toward more restrictive practices, not outward toward better exposure of the profession, This is a "morality" discussion and they always end with the same question ... Whose morals are we going to use as the standard for measuring morality? I am certainly not volunteering mine and I really don't want to debate you on the question of why I don't want yours.
I applaud your decision to condense all your evidence into a clearly written tome that you can offer for sale to the general public.and your fellow Professionals and i am sure there will be a market for it. I just don't think that Gil or I or Fable for that matter would be part of it.
Since this is Micheals thread and he has made the decision to extricate himself from the less than harmonious elements of the discussion and begin anew on another track, I am going to respect that and join him over there.. Perhaps you could start another discussion on Stage Hypnosis and it's history and use it to plomb the depths of the support for your position here.

Namaste,

Hugh Cole
The Prety Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 24, 2009 at 1:39am

Fable said; pleese reed the buk what I rote

Hello Fable, You started my day with a great laugh. Thank you.---- Gil

Fable Goodman said:

Touche Gil!,


I am still very much enjoying this thread,
despite (predicatble) attempts to hijack it to promote a book.

P.S. My own latest book will be on sale soon...
be sure to watch this thread for more details..
I once had an email exchange with a world famous hypnotist,
who amongst other things...
said something nice about my book.

I have kept the emails to prove it.
Just in case anyone ever doubts that I am good writer. pleese reed the buk what I rote

.

LOve and humble hugs,

Fable

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 24, 2009 at 2:11am

Hello Hugh, Forty-five years a Los Angeles tv magazine show filmed an interview and filmed part of my class. They asked for a demonstration of "instant induction" and I lined up (single file) ten class members and as I faced each one I shook their hand and said"SLEEP. Their first subject's knees buckled and he slumped to the floor. The other nine, all followed suit and it made wonderful tv drama. There was a small group of aspiring hypnotists that had regular meetings and when I arrived for the meeting, one of them, "You have set Hypnotism back fifty years with your stupid tv demonstration".I replied, "since that program aired, my phone hasn't stop ringing with people wanting appointments and to join self-hypnosis classes" Since this thread started several people have contacted me for details of my Master Class and two have already registered. Early in my career, I learned that print media advertising was expensive and ineffective (for me, in my market)
so I made a personal visit to EVERY tv and radio station with a 100 mile radius of Los Angeles. I gave them many photos and bio etc.Some program directors booked me immediately others called months or even years later. The point is; my material was in their reference files! Whether it was a major 50,000 watt tv. station or a small FM radio station, they produced results. Eventually, I was on national network shows like 20/20 and similar magazine shows. Now the www has made it easier if one is creative and can move away from what the majority thinks and says.
When I served in the US Navy in World War two, I was taught that' Taking risks is necessary to grow and develop a pattern of succes"---General Krulak, United States Marine Corps.
PS The hypnotist that made that surly remark has long since faded into the dust bin of obscurity.

Hugh Cole said:

Saul,
Micheal is not talking about deleting the thread. He actually cannot.do that. He is beginning another one to focus on the real issue he wanted to discuss. That I think is a marvelous idea because Micheal does have some important issues which may have gotten lost in the specificity of his referances to Gil. This Thread is Marvelous and despite some of the underlying clashes contains a wealth of great information and dialogue.
As you are fairly new to Hypnothoughts, let me also say that Hypnothoughts is a totally open forum for the free and unbiased expression of thoughts and ideas.about Hypnosis. Some discussions, like this one become heated because let's face it. We are ALL passionate about what we do and how we do it. ,,, and since what we do is NOT an exact science ... our thoughts and ideas and theories and observations are all qualatative and subjective, One of the great things about hypnothoughts is that ALL "camps" and ideas are welcome. without recrimination to share ideas. and to grow from them.
My reaction to you is strong, as is Gil's because let's face it both Gil and I see value in public demonstration hypnosis because we do it quite effectively. You are not the first person to come along with a blanket condemnation of all stage Hypnosis practices and you certainly won't be the last. Our reaction is strong because we have been here before and we know where this goes,and particularly here in the United States, you won't find much support for increased regulation and criminalization of "folks that don't do it your way". Regulatory spirals lead inward toward more restrictive practices, not outward toward better exposure of the profession, This is a "morality" discussion and they always end with the same question ... Whose morals are we going to use as the standard for measuring morality? I am certainly not volunteering mine and I really don't want to debate you on the question of why I don't want yours.
I applaud your decision to condense all your evidence into a clearly written tome that you can offer for sale to the general public.and your fellow Professionals and i am sure there will be a market for it. I just don't think that Gil or I or Fable for that matter would be part of it.
Since this is Micheals thread and he has made the decision to extricate himself from the less than harmonious elements of the discussion and begin anew on another track, I am going to respect that and join him over there.. Perhaps you could start another discussion on Stage Hypnosis and it's history and use it to plomb the depths of the support for your position here.

Namaste,

Hugh Cole
The Prety Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 24, 2009 at 4:40am

Hello Dave, An articulate and specific response to every element of the original post and a "spot on" explanation of why some hypnotists avoid the success that the words "hypnosis" and "Sleep" can generate.
I think of the great song from the Musical Play,"Chicago"---"Give 'em the ole Razzle Dazzle".
A bit of "Razzle Dazzle" goes a long way and is always helpful..

Dave Parke said:

Hmmm, so now we are questioning Gil Boyne's techniques. I don't have the years of experience that some of you have but here are my observations.


"Although, I recognize and deeply appreciate Gil Boyne's huge professional standing and contributions to the field, I am asking the questions below because I do not believe that the demonstrations that he shared with us reflect modern hypnotic practice and I wonder what other members of Hypnothoughts.com think about it."

I guess you'd have to define what "modern" practice is and if there's more value in it. Everybody on here may have a different concept of what "modern" practice comprises. Some may feel that a soft, maternal, non-authoritarian way is "modern" while you have people like John Cerbonne and Justin Tranz that are still creating instant shock inductions...so they must be modern too. If by modern you mean an emasculated non-directive non-paternal approach then no...Gil's techniques don't reflect modern practice. You'd have to convince me that "modern" practice has any benefit over its predecessor or predecessors. I just consider it part and parcel of the emasculation of society in general...that seems to be the new definition of "modern". Anything that is paternal, directive, or authoritarian must be atavistic and therefore bad.

1) Do you believe that jerking a standing client's neck and shouting sleep and then guiding him or her into your chair is representative of your hypnosis practice?

I like the wording on this. Do you believe that possibly doing physical harm while yelling at your client is representative of your practice...hmmm, NO. Now if you were to ask me if doing a rapid induction (which is what I see) was common in my practice then I'd have to say yes. I haven't had the opportunity to study with Mr. Boyne (yet) but I have trained with Richard Nongard, John Cerbonne, Brian David Phillips and Justin Tranz. I think the problem that most people have with rapid inductions is they are afraid of doing them. It takes a great deal of courage to do an induction that will possibly leave you looking like an ass if it doesn't work. I know, it took me a long time to overcome that fear myself. If you've ever seen somebody in a street fight or in combat freeze up you know the power of a rapid induction. It's the same effect.


"2) Do you believe that putting your hand in a volunteers or client's face as was done in both of Gil's demos is an effective way to promote our profession or practices?"

I believe that generating results is an effective way to promote our profession and practice. I have had as good or better results with people by using rapid inductions and directive instructions (also utilizing touch as a physical cue) than I ever did by sitting somebody down in a comfy chair (which I spent a lot of money for), taking them through PLR, and then using a non-directive approach. Perhaps your results are different but I have tried (and still use) both methods. For those who haven't tried rapid inductions or directive approaches perhaps it would be beneficial to add these to your repertoire or at least take them for a test drive.

"3) Are convincers like "eye lock" necessary or even helpful in modern hypnotic practice?"

In many (if not most) cases yes. I believe they are helpful in allowing the client to "experience" hypnosis. Otherwise you may wind up with a person who thinks they were very relaxed but nothing else. Again, I find that there is a certain fear that comes up when talking about convincers. We are once again left with a chance we could face "failure" if we don't know where to go from there. I know many hypnotherapists that are content to sit a person down, do PLR, give the suggestions and end the session with no risk to their personal or professional credibility. Instant inductions and convincers can be "scary" for some of us because of a lack in confidence or because of the possibility that they won't work.

As far as the directive, authoritarian approach I can say that just reading "Transforming Therapy" took my regressions to a whole new level. I believe that many people these days have an inability to take on a directive persona and therefore dismiss it and criticize it. It is a kinder and gentler world that is slowly sinking into chaos because people are afraid to take the reins. I think that one of the reasons that people question Gil's techniques is it is a defensive mechanism because they are unable or unwilling to model his approach. Although I'm completely perplexed as to how you could question Gil Boyne's techniques...they may not suit your style, personality, or beliefs but they are tried and true, regardless of your definition of "modern". I'm also a bit surprised that professional hypnotists/hypnotherapists aren't eager to include every possible tool in their box.

As one of my mentors, Hugh Cole, said, choose your mentors wisely. A man with almost half a century of success, hundreds of successful students, and an unrivaled passion and commitment to hypnosis would be an honored mentor of mine any day...regardless of what people considered "modern".

Dave

.

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 24, 2009 at 5:33am

Hello Fable, Have you met the new graduate proudly waving his diploma for his two-day course?
He says; " Last week, I caint evan spell hypoterapriz, today I are one!

Fable said; pleese reed the buk what I rote

Hello Fable, You started my day with a great laugh. Thank you.---- Gil


Fable Goodman said:
Touche Gil!,

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 24, 2009 at 6:11am

Michael said---Dear Gil, I respect and honor you and your achievements - period.

Hello Michael, Thank you for your kind words and for raising an issue that has provoked so many responses.

To the many who reponded with your dire views and ideas, I am pleased to see your commitment to your personal beliefs and your willingness to defend an unpopular cause. I hope that some of the responses may have caused you to rethink some of your positions.
To those who believe as I do in this issue, I feel strengthened by the knowledge that this profession is well protected from those who project shadowy images of "what the Professions and Society" think of "our different behaviours".
Finally, Thank you, Scott, for providing this amazing forum that produces such erudite, sometimes funny and always informative posts. I said before, that for many years, I have been posting on hypnosis related forums and none have ever come close to the diversity, valuable information input and debate opportunities that you have created with Hypnothought'. When it comes to this technological format you are undoubtedly the "MASTER"

I will be posting less in the near future as I will be in Barcelona on holiday (and business) and a group there is interested in promoting a Master Class for me. However, " I shall return".

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on November 24, 2009 at 8:43am

"To the many who reponded with your dire views and ideas, I am pleased to see your commitment to your personal beliefs and your willingness to defend an unpopular cause. I hope that some of the responses may have caused you to rethink some of your positions."


Hello Gil,

Not only am I "willing" to defend an unpopular cause in the (probably vain?) hope of helping the art and science of hypnotherapy to achieve more than just the tiniest fraction of its true potential, but I've dedicated years of my life to
realizing that goal. However, I am also a "realist", and thus understand full well that it is simply too much to expect those who make their living (and often a good living at that!) by exploiting this blessed phenomenon for the purpose of "entertainment" and by providing their audiences with cheap thrills for a few bucks, to reconsider the terrible harm they're doing to its IMAGE as a force for HEALING and to rethink THEIR position.
Human nature being what it is, I KNOW that is not going to happen anytime soon, and it saddens me to think that another century of two of LOST POTENTIAL will almost certainly pass by before anything changes. Maybe even never.
But just in case anyone here is even remotely interested in learning from the past, I've decided to copy & paste a few pages of my book that deal with this SAME issue way back in the 1800's. Actually there is plenty more where that came from (numerous other quotes from a great number of other sources), but if these words of wisdom from the past don't at least raise a FEW doubts in your minds, then it would be a total waste of your time to read any further...




Throughout the years, stage-hypnotists often claimed that, if it hadn't been for their "public exhibitions", the phenomenon of hypnotism would have been totally forgotten after being abandoned by the medical establishment back in the 1780’s. This justification is misleading however, for considering the extensive harm that such exhibitions always caused to the image and reputation of hypnotism, its relegation to obscurity would have been the best thing that could ever have happened! At least, until mankind was capable of displaying a rational, dispassionate, scientific attitude when undertaking its examination.
Sensationalistic exhibitions would never fail to attract attention all right, but who needed that kind of attention!?

This sentiment was eloquently expressed by Martineau (1845), when writing:
“I believe there is no doubt that the greatest of all injuries done to Mesmerism is by its itinerant advocates. This appears to be admitted by everybody but the itinerants themselves...But no man of enlarged views, of knowledge...would venture upon the perilous rashness of making a public exhibition of the solemn wonders yet so new and impressive, of playing upon the brain and nerves of human beings, exhibiting for money on a stage states of mind and soul held too sacred in olden times to be elicited elsewhere than in temples, by the hands of the priests of the gods...It is true, the blame of their desecration rests with the learned men who ought to have shown themselves wise in relation to a matter so serious, and to have taken the investigation into their own hands. It is they who are answerable for having turned over the subject to the fanatical and the vulgar. It is they who have cast this jewel of knowledge and power into the lap of the ignorant; and no one can wonder that it is bartered for money and notoriety. The spectacle is a disgusting and a terrible one,- disgusting as making a stimulating public show of what cannot be witnessed (even) in the quietest privacy without emotions of awe...and terrible as making common and unclean that which, at least at present, is sanctified by mystery, (and) by complete unfitness for (public) use. It is urged that public exhibitions of mesmeric phenomena attract much attention to the subject...This may be true, but what an amount of mischief is there to set off against this! There is much more wonder, doubt and disgust caused than conviction, and the sort of conviction so originated could, on the whole, be very well dispensed with...It would be something gained if the honest among these lecturers could be taught and convinced that they had better be quiet, and let the matter alone, rather than propagate Mesmerism by such a method...”
(pp. 48-49)

As far as that goes, moreover, Bell (1792; in Sibly, 1810) had already noted back in Mesmer’s day that: “...a prudent man, willing to do good to his fellow creatures who labour under any infirmities, will never treat his patients in public, and make them walk in their sleep, or do many other things: it is very well to convince incredulous people of the effects, but cannot do good to the patient.” (p. 264)


* * *


There were those who would say that “cannot do good to the patient” was a gross understatement. Take Hoek (1852) for instance, who’d warned that: “It shouldn’t surprise us that some despise and ridicule (the phenomenon) when they see that her proponents themselves have so little respect for it that they travel with carnivals from town to town, like jugglers and magicians, to demonstrate their art for a handful of money...they have humiliated the phenomenon, and made it a “con game” for the public.” (pp. 5-6)

In fact, to hear Barth (1853) tell it:
“Many would rather suffer from disease than accept a cure at the hands of the mesmeriser. If we would ascertain the cause of their dislike to mesmerism, we shall find that they are not alarmed by the statements of its opponents, but disgusted by the follies and injudicious conduct of some of its avowed friends and supporters. It is indeed questionable if the spread of mesmerism is not as much retarded by friends as by enemies...The practice of mesmerism for any other purpose than the cure of disease has been especially deprecated...Phenomena which would excite the wonder and serious contemplation of the profoundest of philosophers are made a matter of sport, fun, and idle amusement...and a game at mesmerism becomes for grown-up children what blind man’s buff is for the juveniles. The tricks which are played on the unfortunate subject very often end in distress or mischief, and thus one of the most worthy powers which has been conferred on humanity is desecrated and turned into a matter which serious people view with apprehension, and suffering invalids reject because they can feel no respect for that which they have known only as something causing innocent unsuspecting people to suffer or to do ridiculously absurd things and be laughed at by others.”
(pp. 89-91)

After all, as Stigter (1900) reminds us: “No matter how heartily people laugh at somebody who drinks bitter water thinking it’s wine, or who, puffing with imaginary warmth, loosens his clothing- hardly any of them would want to be in the same situation, not for all the money in the world.” (p. 4)

Finally, consider the following bit of sage advice from Gregory (1851): “I would once more repeat, that Animal Magnetism is not a plaything, not a toy, not the amusement for an idle hour, not a means of gratifying a morbid craving for novelty, or for the marvellous...Neither is it a thing to be exhibited to gaping crowds for money; to crowds who stare and laugh, and go away thinking it very strange or very funny. It is a serious subject, well worthy of the most earnest and devout attention we can give to it. It is painful to see it abused to raise a laugh; and so strongly do I feel this that, for my own share, I object to all exhibitions of it, public or private...All exhibitions in which mere amusement is the object tend to degrade science, and to retard its progress.” (p. 335)

Permalink Reply by Lee Pelletier on November 24, 2009 at 12:21pm

First, let me ask Gil, have you updated Transforming Therapy since 1989, or is it still the best of your work to buy in that area? I looked it up on Amazon and they only have the 1989 edition available. Tempting to buy it.

Now, on to the discussion at hand. As I said in an earlier comment on this discussion, sometimes the need to be right about issues overshadows the more important question. "How can I be more effective as a hypnotist" (since I am in NY I cannot legally represent what I do as hypnotherapy). Gil has proven himself to be extraordinarily effective in his hypnotic work. Some others that have posted on this topic have made extraordinary contributions as well.

This subject area may be where my background as a clergyman might be helpful. If you attend enough church services of different denominations, you will experience a multitude of different ways of calling people to faith in God. Should you attend a Roman Catholic service you will find extraordinary attention to the sacraments and to certain liturgy. Should you attend an Episcopal service, most of the time you will find it very much like a Roman Catholic service and it will again be very formal and liturgical. A Methodist service will ordinarily be less tied to the liturgy, but will still be a staid and conservative service. I could go on through the list of denominations that have services that are staid and conservative. On the other hand, if you attend an African Methodist Episcopal service you will find lots of action and emotional intensity. Similarly, if you attend a Charismatic service, you will find lots of expressiveness and emotion, with some added expressions of the Power of God. While the music in the former settings will be conservative and old fashioned, at the AME or Charismatic or many Baptist Churches, the music and program will amaze you. Likewise with sermons. Jonathan Edwards wrote a remarkable sermon that kicked off the American Great Awakening called "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God." He read the sermon from his notes in a monotone voice so as not to let his emotion interfere with the work of the Holy Spirit. That is one of the most legendary sermons ever preached. Today any hypnosis professional reading it is likely to notice some hypnotic elements, but you know that Edwards would have known nothing of hypnosis as we understand it, because when that sermon was written and delivered in 1741 Anton Mesmer would have been 7 years old. As I listen to preachers, my own taste runs to preaching that draws me emotionally closer to God and creates Vivid word pictures, but my Episcopal friends would call me shallow. If you want to hear sermons by an amazing hypnotist who has no idea that he is using hypnotic techniques, listen to the sermons of Ravi Zacharias. But, I digress (I do that as a preacher and as a hypnotist and as a teacher).

My point is that different people respond to different things. Some people respond much more favorably to the kind of work done by Gil Boyne. It amazes so many of the senses and he has skills at reading people of which he may not even fully be aware. Others respond more favorably to what Dave calls the emasculatedly maternal approach of the wordy PLR and non-directive approaches. Remarkably, the discussion has gone on long and some "ad hominem" attacks have developed, which serves no one well. I look forward to us keeping the discussion at the idea level instead of at the "personal" level. I derive great benefit when each shares his or her rationale for their approach. The value diminishes sharply when discourse descends to the level of "ad hominem" attack (attacking the person as oppose to discussing the ideas).

As to whether public shows (Hypnosis Stage Shows) have a positive or negative impact, along with the kinds of techniques that Gil showed in the videos from Budapest, I can tell you roughly what percentage of the person will like it and what percentage will be turned off by it. Between 25% and 35% will absolutely be drawn toward hypnotism in a favorable way because of the shows. Approximately 20%-30% are likely to be so turned off by the stage shows as to doubt that there is any real value in hypnosis. The rest are in the so-called "muddy middle" and will neither be put-off nor turned on. Overall, physicians are much more likely to fall into the "turned off" category. Why? It has to do with their DISC profile that I mentioned in an earlier post. "D" factor and "I" factor high people are drawn to that which is flashy and showy and can make them look good (most stage hypnotists will be "D" or "I", but not all). The "S" factor high tends to like to avoid the spotlight and eschew the showy. The "C" factor high will be so concerned for process and procedure as to find shows difficult to take. The unpredictability of the stage show will often make it hard for "S" or "C" factor high folk to want to be stage hypnotists. Similarly, they will tend to shy away from the instant and rapid approaches favored by Gil and many others. (Again, I unpack the 4 styles in an earlier post so don't want to go on about that here).

Why should you care? Because your effectiveness will be enhanced if you know that different people respond differently to different approaches to hypnosis. You already know that, but this explains some of the difference. We will ALWAYS need multiple approaches. Some people will not, as Roy Hunter suggests, ever fly from Seattle to Denver (Football fans know, for example that John Madden will drive all night rather than to fly). Some will want to take the back roads, while others want the 8 lane super-highway. It is all a matter of individual preference.

I wonder what would happen if we kept discussion of concepts like this at the idea level and left off the "ad hominem" attacks? I am so grateful to be part of a profession for which there is no one right way, but a number of workable approaches.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• Next ›
• Page