The How and Why of Hypnosis...the bottom line

I don't know if I ever presented the bottom line of my hypnosis model but I figured some may be interested so here it is:

We are able to be hypnotized because we are simply amplifying an existing natural ability that we already have to automatically react to outside input.

When a hypnotic trance state exists, our ability to determine what is real and true is diminished.

This ability to distinguish what truth and reality are...is often referred to as the critical faculty or factor.

The reason we can implement change using hypnosis is because of another natural ability we have to automatically adapt to changing environments, whatever we believe that environment to be.

This is because as stated above, when in hypnotic trance, we don't know what is real or true...so in a hypnotic trance state, it all is real, and we will automatically adapt to what is presented (as long as there is no reason not to).

This is the same way that our body automatically adapts itself to what we "expect" to happen.

This is why so many different approaches still work with hypnosis.

The key word in the above completion of my model is "automatically".

This is why I labeled our automatic reaction to outside input that we use to multi-task as our natural "trance" state, and the amplified version...the hypnotic trance state..where we automatically react to suggested input via the intellect. In both cases it is still just automatically reacting to input.

I figured there might be different viewpoints...so there it is :)

John

Favorite

0 members favorited this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on February 27, 2012 at 7:23pm

Hi Michael,

The issue I have with hypnosis being defined a persuasive art.. is that while it can be used as a persuasive art by the hypnotist, it is not required to do so to be effective.

I do not doubt the power of the placebo effect, in fact I understand how it actually works from a process viewpoint.

The difference is...that there can be zero belief systems in place, by either the hypnotist...or the subject...yet the subject can still be hypnotized if they follows directions.

...and that to me...is the hole in that boat.

I've actually tested this one Michael, a skeptic vs a non hypnotist reading a script. It was really cool!

John

Michael Ellner said:

Hi John, et al,

I am approaching this as a friendly and respectful exploration of models and related techniques.

My belief is that at this point in time the available evidence suggests that hypnosis is a persuasive art. I believe that the models and techniques that are used in hypnosis are metaphors and their effectiveness is related to the set and setting. Example, depending on what a person is told the same drug can produce nausea or relieve nausea (with or without conventional entrancement.) The suggestion by-passes any conscious intervention and operates solely on beliefs and expectations because in that situation it is reasonable to believe and expect what you are told. I believe that when a client accepts the embedded suggestion that going through whatever hypnotic process will produce their desired outcome they automatically react to the hypnotic ritual part of the session accordingly...

In that sense , I believe that once a client believes, expects and is excited about change just about any model/technique can be effective...

Michael E.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Celeste Hackett, CH on February 27, 2012 at 7:28pm

Thanks for this. It was very good.

Sometimes I just like to say to my clients, hypnosis allows the conscious and subconscious mind to communicate and share information more freely when called upon to do so. So when we want the conscious mind to implement new behaviors, for example, the subconscious mind allows new suggestions for such in and to take effect when in hypnosis. When we want the scm to share or enlighten the conscious mind to the causes of problems it can do so easily upon request when in hypnosis. The state of hypnosis is the key that opens the door or doors between the levels of the mind to allow sharing of information, experience, feelings and insights.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael Ellner on February 28, 2012 at 4:24am

Hi John,

I think that we are talking about "apples" and "pears"

I am specifically speaking to the utilization of "hypnosis." I am aware that early research into hypnosis often employed grad students, actors and/or pre-recorded inductions to entrance" (hypnotize) approximately 80% of the studies subjects, but they were not exploring changing behaviors or breaking habits in those studies. When I say hypnosis is a persuasive art - I am speaking to the utilization of conventional and non-conventional "trance states" for creating change. (Waking hypnosis/NLP demonstrates that conventional entrancement is not necessary for creating change.)

Would you agree that hypnosis is persuasive in this context?

Michael E.

John Celestial said:

Hi Michael,

The issue I have with hypnosis being defined a persuasive art.. is that while it can be used as a persuasive art by the hypnotist, it is not required to do so to be effective.

I do not doubt the power of the placebo effect, in fact I understand how it actually works from a process viewpoint.

The difference is...that there can be zero belief systems in place, by either the hypnotist...or the subject...yet the subject can still be hypnotized if they follows directions.

...and that to me...is the hole in that boat.

I've actually tested this one Michael, a skeptic vs a non hypnotist reading a script. It was really cool!

John

Michael Ellner said:

Hi John, et al,

I am approaching this as a friendly and respectful exploration of models and related techniques.

My belief is that at this point in time the available evidence suggests that hypnosis is a persuasive art. I believe that the models and techniques that are used in hypnosis are metaphors and their effectiveness is related to the set and setting. Example, depending on what a person is told the same drug can produce nausea or relieve nausea (with or without conventional entrancement.) The suggestion by-passes any conscious intervention and operates solely on beliefs and expectations because in that situation it is reasonable to believe and expect what you are told. I believe that when a client accepts the embedded suggestion that going through whatever hypnotic process will produce their desired outcome they automatically react to the hypnotic ritual part of the session accordingly...

In that sense , I believe that once a client believes, expects and is excited about change just about any model/technique can be effective...

Michael E.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on February 28, 2012 at 10:24am

Hi Michael,

I have found that hypnosis and hypnotic trance has been understandably misunderstood by many for a long time.

What I mean is...that some people feel a hypnotic trance can only be manifested by a traditional induction instead of understanding what that induction is really doing and accomplishing it by different means.

(i.e. waking hypnosis, nlp, etc.)

I have found that hypnotic trance is repeatably manifested when the focus of attention is internal to the body, and input is generated by the imagination, by whatever method(s) are used to facilitate this.

This is the basic hypnotic trance mechanism.

(Not to be confused with our natural trance state where we automatically react to input from the senses via our peripheral awareness...aka multitasking)

It can be as easy and quick as suggesting the subject feel something in their body, or to take an existing feeling and having them change it.
We should all know by now that sleep, relax, etc. are just reacted to because they are suggestions that we provide that are understood and there is no reason not to.

In order for a suggestion to be automatically reacted to; how to react must be understood (or it results in confusion), and there can be no reason for them not to (which is their natural protection at work).

To me; hypnosis is just the process of creating a purposeful hypnotic trance state.

And trance states; (both natural and hypnotic) are all about automatic reactions..not willful compliance.

So I personally think that the term persuasion is not one I would use because of this, but I can see how it can be construed as such using the type and style of techniques that you use...so I have no real issue with it.

Perhaps you can now see that you are indeed using an induction by activating the hypnotic trance mechanism, it is just not the traditional method.

It appears that trance effects and change work all hinges around our natural ability to automatically adapt to a changing environment, and influencing the judgmental mind

This is where our belief systems come into play.

Our body will try to automatically adapt when presented with a new reality, real or perceived.

If we consider the change to be real and true, our body (our mind) automatically prepares us to adapt to it.

This is why expectancy works so well.

The beauty of a hypnotic trance is... that it all becomes true (or as you would say...suspension of disbelief) because of the shut down of the analytical mind.

So whatever is presented in a hypnotic trance state, is automatically adapted to or reacted to as the case may be, as long as the two above conditions are met...(how to adapt or react is understood, and there is no reason not to).

John

Michael Ellner said:

Hi John,

I think that we are talking about "apples" and "pears"

I am specifically speaking to the utilization of "hypnosis." I am aware that early research into hypnosis often employed grad students, actors and/or pre-recorded inductions to entrance" (hypnotize) approximately 80% of the studies subjects, but they were not exploring changing behaviors or breaking habits in those studies. When I say hypnosis is a persuasive art - I am speaking to the utilization of conventional and non-conventional "trance states" for creating change. (Waking hypnosis/NLP demonstrates that conventional entrancement is not necessary for creating change.)

Would you agree that hypnosis is persuasive in this context?

Michael E.

John Celestial said:

Hi Michael,

The issue I have with hypnosis being defined a persuasive art.. is that while it can be used as a persuasive art by the hypnotist, it is not required to do so to be effective.

I do not doubt the power of the placebo effect, in fact I understand how it actually works from a process viewpoint.

The difference is...that there can be zero belief systems in place, by either the hypnotist...or the subject...yet the subject can still be hypnotized if they follows directions.

...and that to me...is the hole in that boat.

I've actually tested this one Michael, a skeptic vs a non hypnotist reading a script. It was really cool!

John

Michael Ellner said:

Hi John, et al,

I am approaching this as a friendly and respectful exploration of models and related techniques.

My belief is that at this point in time the available evidence suggests that hypnosis is a persuasive art. I believe that the models and techniques that are used in hypnosis are metaphors and their effectiveness is related to the set and setting. Example, depending on what a person is told the same drug can produce nausea or relieve nausea (with or without conventional entrancement.) The suggestion by-passes any conscious intervention and operates solely on beliefs and expectations because in that situation it is reasonable to believe and expect what you are told. I believe that when a client accepts the embedded suggestion that going through whatever hypnotic process will produce their desired outcome they automatically react to the hypnotic ritual part of the session accordingly...

In that sense , I believe that once a client believes, expects and is excited about change just about any model/technique can be effective...

Michael E.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jeff Rader on February 28, 2012 at 2:56pm

John, perhaps a clarification: I see conscious perception as that which the subconscious part of the mind provides the conscious. This is more often than not, raw information from our neurology pre-processed by our subconscious minds.

The subconscious mind, while intelligent, does not itself care about the information but rather about giving the conscious mind what it wants and is looking for based on already consciously decided upon criteria. To do this, the subconscious must distort this information before presenting it. This distortion can be seen as such things as positive and negative hallucinations, as well as reminders about associations already consciously decided on. Because the subconscious mind has the ability recognize patterns, this allows the subconscious to subjectively distort the information it provides based on not only specific conscious decisions but also patterns of conscious decisions.

Activity taken in by our 5 senses causes our conscious minds to learn to observe and form associations as well as opinions. At first these opinions are very primitive but are nothing more than flavored associations. It is said that the first two major fears comes from the birthing process. We experience not liking that swat on the butt and not liking being held by our ankles when that happened. This experience produces a fear of falling as well as loud noises. While the conscious mind at that age is barely able to do more than primitive observations and association making, newborns universally and dramatically express their feelings about being held upside down and swatted. Their reaction is to cry, loudly. Fortunately, this is exactly the purpose of doing so. It makes sure the baby is breathing and helps clear those little lungs. Mind you, this may not be what happens anymore as procedures to change over time. But babies don't know that. :)

How we consciously react to experience as also taken note of by our subconscious minds. The pain, pleasure, abruptness, smoothness, chaotic and organized nature of experience taints a given experience and that is associated with that experience. One of the criteria the subconscious uses to distort information it presents is based on the patterns of conscious reactions to past experiences.

In the case of a fear of little bugs, the fear can be traced back to a conscious decision about a one or more experience in regards to little bugs. Perhaps getting stung or bit by these bugs provided enough unpleasant experience to develop an opinion about the experience(s); which, over the course of time, twisted from annoyance to fear. This same thing can also come from observation of others. They may observe the telling of 1st, 2nd and 3rd hand experiences.

Regardless of how the fear came into being, it is originally conscious involvement with experiences, leading to conscious decisions about what to think about these experiences, mixed with other learned (1st, 2nd or 3rd hand) associations, which leads the subconscious mind to distort what it presents to the conscious mind. This distortion may not be anything more than a reminder of previous (a) experience(s) to enhance or flavor the new experience.

Short answer, the subconscious mind is a conscious-intent driven (re)programmable intelligent autopilot, perception filter and information storage/processing/retrieval system. It can be the conscious mind's best friend or worst enemy; It is faithful in all it does, desiring to do nothing more than please the conscious mind, even to the point of being purposely defective or provide false information, but that all depends on conscious intent and past decisions.

Perhaps not as eloquent as I would have liked but I hope it's more clear than mud.

John Cleesattel said:

I will disagree with the statement that the unconscious/subconscious mind observes reality. If that were true, we would never be afraid of little bugs.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on February 28, 2012 at 6:09pm

I hope your model works well for you :)

John

Jeff Rader said:

John, perhaps a clarification: I see conscious perception as that which the subconscious part of the mind provides the conscious. This is more often than not, raw information from our neurology pre-processed by our subconscious minds.

The subconscious mind, while intelligent, does not itself care about the information but rather about giving the conscious mind what it wants and is looking for based on already consciously decided upon criteria. To do this, the subconscious must distort this information before presenting it. This distortion can be seen as such things as positive and negative hallucinations, as well as reminders about associations already consciously decided on. Because the subconscious mind has the ability recognize patterns, this allows the subconscious to subjectively distort the information it provides based on not only specific conscious decisions but also patterns of conscious decisions.

Activity taken in by our 5 senses causes our conscious minds to learn to observe and form associations as well as opinions. At first these opinions are very primitive but are nothing more than flavored associations. It is said that the first two major fears comes from the birthing process. We experience not liking that swat on the butt and not liking being held by our ankles when that happened. This experience produces a fear of falling as well as loud noises. While the conscious mind at that age is barely able to do more than primitive observations and association making, newborns universally and dramatically express their feelings about being held upside down and swatted. Their reaction is to cry, loudly. Fortunately, this is exactly the purpose of doing so. It makes sure the baby is breathing and helps clear those little lungs. Mind you, this may not be what happens anymore as procedures to change over time. But babies don't know that. :)

How we consciously react to experience as also taken note of by our subconscious minds. The pain, pleasure, abruptness, smoothness, chaotic and organized nature of experience taints a given experience and that is associated with that experience. One of the criteria the subconscious uses to distort information it presents is based on the patterns of conscious reactions to past experiences.

In the case of a fear of little bugs, the fear can be traced back to a conscious decision about a one or more experience in regards to little bugs. Perhaps getting stung or bit by these bugs provided enough unpleasant experience to develop an opinion about the experience(s); which, over the course of time, twisted from annoyance to fear. This same thing can also come from observation of others. They may observe the telling of 1st, 2nd and 3rd hand experiences.

Regardless of how the fear came into being, it is originally conscious involvement with experiences, leading to conscious decisions about what to think about these experiences, mixed with other learned (1st, 2nd or 3rd hand) associations, which leads the subconscious mind to distort what it presents to the conscious mind. This distortion may not be anything more than a reminder of previous (a) experience(s) to enhance or flavor the new experience.

Short answer, the subconscious mind is a conscious-intent driven (re)programmable intelligent autopilot, perception filter and information storage/processing/retrieval system. It can be the conscious mind's best friend or worst enemy; It is faithful in all it does, desiring to do nothing more than please the conscious mind, even to the point of being purposely defective or provide false information, but that all depends on conscious intent and past decisions.

Perhaps not as eloquent as I would have liked but I hope it's more clear than mud.

John Cleesattel said:

I will disagree with the statement that the unconscious/subconscious mind observes reality. If that were true, we would never be afraid of little bugs.