What is trance?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on November 9, 2009 at 5:17pm

And what drugs are you taking that has given you this trance experience? LOL.


Scott Brown said:

Hypnosis does not exist except in the realms of someone imagination, its just suggestion working thought the imagination.

The word Trance is used to describes a weird experience usually brought about through drugs or some hippy practice like deep breathing.

Warmest Regards

Scott

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan French on November 9, 2009 at 5:55pm

I was in a hurry when I first posted and only included the neurological information (that I know...I'm certain that there's tons I don't know).

I liked what James said: I say trance when I'm too lazy to say hypnosis.

I've begun to tell clients that hypnosis is like being lost in thought, so engrossed in a thought or a singular activity like watching TV, reading, being on the computer that you lose awareness of other external events. That seems to really turn on the lightbulbs.

I'd sure like to know what happens with the prefrontal cortex and any other reasoning part of the brain when we go into the state we have come to call "trance" or "hypnosis".

Susan

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan French on November 9, 2009 at 5:57pm

Hi John,

I read that we go into hypnosis every 90 minutes for roughly 15 minutes.

John Cerbone - The Trance-Master said:

1st - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trance
2nd - A naturally occuring brain-wave pattern energy shift into relaxation that occurs 7 times a day in the average person, which opens the mind to possibilities and suggestion. The way your brain is designed to bring down stress and say healthy.
3rd - the 1st half of my stage name, LOL

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cleesattel on November 9, 2009 at 8:34pm

Bummer dude. I enjoy having both, no fish involved. LOL
John

Scott Brown said:

Since there are no adequate definitions of trance and no means whereby one can test for that state then its likely a Red Herring in regards to hypnosis

Warmest Regards

Scott

John Cleesattel said:

And what drugs are you taking that has given you this trance experience? LOL.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Cerbone - The Trance-Master on November 9, 2009 at 8:37pm

We are going into Hypnosis/Trance every 22 minutes for some moment of time.
For years here in NYC, there has been an AM News-Station which says, "Give us 22 minutes, and we'll give you the World."
It occured to me, after 22 minutes, the average person is in relaxation/trance/hypnosis, so 22 minutes is about all they are going to get before the subconscious kicks in anyway, as the mind wanders and relaxes, as the critical mind is taking a break. LOL

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan French on November 10, 2009 at 5:33am

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the additional information. I love the depth of your information and appreciate it.

Perhaps I'm mis-using the word "state." but now that you've brought it up, I wonder what we would define as a "state." Do you have some ideas?

Thanks much,

Susan

Michael Ellner said:

Hi Susan-

Although, the relatively newly discovered fast moving gamma brain waves have been linked to perception, meditation and focused attention, one challenge all hypnosis professional face is that modern technology has been unable to find a signature brain wave state that is unique to hypnosis. In that sense there is no such "thing" as a "hypnotic state"

Michael E.

Susan French said:

If I'm not mistaken, the state we recognize as trance is when the brain wave frequencies slow down to Alpha frequency and a little bit of Theta frequency. The Alpha frequency is 8 to 13 cycles per second (or hertz). You can only go a few cycles per seconds of frequency into Theta before you go into the state we recognize as sleep.

I believe I also read that we go into alpha state every 90 minutes or so for about 15 minutes. I have a hunch (but have not read this anywhere) that the cognitive function (probably prefrontal cortex) disengages or relaxes and is less dominant. I think that what we metaphorically refer to as 'conscious mind' is the prefrontal cortex, the logical, reasoning part of the brain.

I have no clue what parts of the brain/body we mean when we say the 'subconscious mind',' I'd love to learn it if anyone knows.

I also believe that each brain wave frequency is present all the time at different levels of consciousness but one frequency becomes more dominant. I'm not sure about this though.

I'm always more comfortable when I take take something metaphorical (trance) and identify it in the physical and tangible, but that's me.

In my always present determination to take metaphors and make them tangible and concrete, I think of hypnosis as being the brain wave state that exists between a waking state and a sleeping state.

Susan
.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan French on November 10, 2009 at 5:34am

Hi John,

My information said that we drift into hypnosis every 90 minutes for about 15 minutes. Is that incorrect? I'll to find where I read it.

Thanks,

Susan

John Cerbone - The Trance-Master said:

We are going into Hypnosis/Trance every 22 minutes for some moment of time.
For years here in NYC, there has been an AM News-Station which says, "Give us 22 minutes, and we'll give you the World."
It occured to me, after 22 minutes, the average person is in relaxation/trance/hypnosis, so 22 minutes is about all they are going to get before the subconscious kicks in anyway, as the mind wanders and relaxes, as the critical mind is taking a break. LOL

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 16, 2009 at 2:42am

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
] The Original Meaning of Hypnotism
What Braid Really Said:
The Original Meaning of Hypnotism
Copyright (c) Donald Robertson 2009 www.UKhypnosis.com

James Braid was the Scottish physician and surgeon who coined the term
"hypnotism" and essentially founded hypnotherapy as we know it today, in
opposition to the "animal magnetism" of the Mesmerists. Fourteen years
after discovering hypnotism, Braid wrote his last book on the subject,
The Physiology of Fascination (1855), the text of a lecture to be read
before the prestigious British Association. By this time, Braid had come
to define hypnotism as "the study of the reciprocal actions and
reactions of mind and matter upon each other", the key term here being
"reciprocal" because hypnotism originally involved not only the power of
the mind over the body but also the power of the body over the mind.

Braid carried out many ingenious experiments to test the claims of the
mesmerists and convinced himself that their perceived effects were not
due to animal magnetism or any special force or subtle energy
transmitted by the mesmerist. Instead, he found that "the condition
arose from influences existing within the patient's own body, viz.,
the influence of concentrated attention, or dominant ideas, in modifying
physical action, and these dynamic changes re-acting on the mind of the
subject." Hence, although the terms "mesmerism" and "hypnotism" are
often confused today, Braid was clear that he introduced the term
"hypnotism" to distinguish his psychological and physiological theory
from the supernatural theory of Mesmer and his many followers. However,
after over a decade of experimentation and clinical practice in
hypnotism, Braid now proposed to modify his terminology.

First, Braid rejects the notion that hypnotism refers to a single state
of mind. "This term has met with most favourable consideration from many
able writers on the subject; still it is liable to this grave objection
– that it has been used to comprise not a single state, but rather a
series of stages or conditions, varying in every conceivable degree,
from the slightest reverie, with high exaltation of the functions called
into action, on the one hand, to intense nervous coma, with entire
abolition of consciousness and voluntary power, on the other." The word
"hypnotism" was originally an abbreviation for the term
"neuro-hypnotism" meaning "nervous sleep", as Braid puts it, or
neurological inhibition, as we might put it today. Braid never intended
the term to imply that subjects were asleep in the ordinary sense of the
word, and this turn of phrase caused much confusion among his patients.
I am well aware that, in correct phraseology, the term hypnotism ought
to be restricted to the phenomena manifested in patients who actually
pass into a state of sleep, and who remember nothing on awakening of
what transpired during their sleep. All short of this is mere reverie,
or dreaming, however provoked, and it, therefore, seems highly desirable
to fix upon a terminology capable of accurately characterising these
latter modifications which result from hypnotic processes. This is the
more requisite from the fact that, of those who may be relieved and
cured by hypnotic processes of diseases which obstinately resist
ordinary medical treatment, perhaps not more than one in ten ever passes
into the state of oblivious sleep, during the processes which they are
subjected to. The term hypnotism, therefore, is apt to confuse them, and
lead them to suspect that, at all events, they cannot be benefited by
processes which fail to produce the most obvious indication which the
name imports. So, according to Braid here, as elsewhere, only 10% of his
patients experienced complete amnesia during hypnotism, or anything
which could be compared to a sleep-like state. It may surprise many
people to realise that this observation agrees with that of Bernheim and
most other Victorian hypnotists. Only a small minority of their patients
entered the sleep-like state called "somnambulism" and it was not
generally considered particularly important to the practice of
hypnotherapy. Braid apparently intended to continue using the
established term "hypnotism" to refer to the subject of mind-body
interaction in general, when speaking loosely, but to clarify that,
strictly speaking, the term "hypnotism" should only be taken to describe
a minority of subjects who experience profound amnesia during the
process. Let the term hypnotism be restricted to those cases alone in
which, by certain artificial processes, oblivious sleep takes place, in
which the subject has no remembrance on awaking of what occurred during
his sleep, but of which he shall have the most perfect recollection on
passing into a similar stage of hypnotism thereafter. In this mode,
hypnotism will comprise those cases only in which what has hitherto been
called the double-conscious state ["somnambulism"] occurs; and let the
term hypnotic coma denote that still deeper stage of the sleep in which
the patient seems to be quite unconscious at the time of all external
impressions, and devoid of voluntary power, and in whom no idea of what
had been said or done by others during the said state of hypnotic coma
can be remembered by the patient on awaking, or at any stage of
subsequent hypnotic operations. Far from sleep, the essence of hypnotism
was awareness. Braid now defined hypnotism as a state of mental focus or
concentration upon a dominant conscious idea. Then, inasmuch as I feel
satisfied that the mental and physical phenomena which flow from said
processes result entirely from the mental impressions, or dominant
ideas, excited thereby in the minds of the subjects, changing or
modifying the previously existing physical action, and the peculiar
physical action thus superinduced re-acting on their minds – and
that, whether these dominant, expectant ideas existed in the minds of
the subjects previously, or were suggested to them, after passing into
the impressible condition, by audible suggestions or sensible
impressions excited by manipulations of a second party – under these
circumstances, I consider the following terms calculated to realise all
the precision which we need desire on this point...Braid proposed to use
the term "monoideism", and various cognate expressions, instead, meaning
the concentration of the mind upon a single dominant idea or train of
thought. Braid borrowed the terms "ideo-motor reflex" and "ideo-motor
reflex" from his friend Prof. W.B. Carpenter who proposed a theory of
unconscious muscular action caused in a semi-reflex manner by certain
ideas or images. Braid added the concept of expectation and focused
attention to this simple model of suggestion, to form the basis of his
theory of hypnotism. In order that I may do full justice to two
esteemed friends, I beg to state, in connection with this term
monoideo-dynamics, that, several years ago, Dr. W. B. Carpenter
introduced the term ideo-motor to characterise the reflex or automatic
muscular motions which arise merely from ideas associated with motion
existing in the mind, without any conscious effort of volition. In 1853,
in referring to this term, Dr. [Daniel] Noble said, "Ideo-dynamic
would probably constitute a phraseology more appropriate, as applicable
to a wider range of phenomena." In this opinion I quite concurred,
because I was well aware that an idea could arrest as well as excite
motion automatically, not only in the muscles of voluntary motion, but
also as regards the condition of every other function of the body.
[Braid had long recognised that hypnosis could either stimulate or
depress nervous functioning in general.] I have, therefore, adopted the
term monoideo-dynamics, as still more comprehensive and characteristic
as regards the true mental relations which subsist during all dynamic
changes which take place, in every other function of the body, as well
as in the muscles of voluntary motion.To this he adds, "as a generic
term, comprising the whole of these phenomena which result from the
reciprocal actions of mind and matter upon each other, I think no term
could be more appropriate than psycho-physiology." Of course,
"psycho-physiology" means something like "mind-body" and Braid prefers
it as an umbrella term for the many respects in which the mind and body
inter-act reciprocally upon each other. He concludes, It must be
obvious that these terms would comprehend every conceivable variety of
phenomenon, according to the function of the part on which the dominant
idea of the subject might be concentrated, and the liveliness of his
faith. Thus, let the mind of the subject be engrossed with the notion
that he is to be irresistibly drawn, repelled, paralysed, or catalepsed,
and the monoideo-dynamic or ideational condition of the muscles
corresponding with this idea will take place, without any conscious
effort of volition of the subject to that effect. In brief, contrary to
popular misconception,
1. Braid opposed hypnotism to mesmerism, they are not the same thing.
2. Only 10% of Braid's subjects felt as if they were asleep or
unconscious, and this was not essential to hypnotism.
3. Far from being a passive state like sleep, hypnotism was defined
as a variety of states revolving around focused conscious attention and
heightened expectation.
4. Hypnotism was not simply a theory of the power of suggestion but
of the reciprocal power of psycho-physiology, of the mind and body
inter-acting in both directions.
5. In addition to verbal suggestion, therefore, Braid emphasised what
he termed "muscular suggestion", in which subjects changed their body
posture or facial expression to evoke mental states.
I hope these brief comments will encourage some hypnotists to read
Braid's work more closely and rediscover the true nature of the original
hypnotism, because many of the misconceptions about hypnotherapy which
abound today are the result of confusing hypnotism and mesmerism, and a
"return to Braid" would allow us to set the record straight in a way
that can only benefit our clients.


.
Hugh, I think this is a great answer!
Could it be that utilization is more important to us than the correctness of the model?.. Could it be that we "less than conciously" recognize that *any* concept about the mind is simply a model or metaphor whose underlying value lies in the metaphorical concept of .. "usefulness".? Could it be that imprinting useful beliefs ... learning useful skills ,, or just plain learning ... is the begining and ending of the purpose of the this "trance thing" we biped earth traveling trance machines "do" and that any definition of "trance" is only about learning why we would want to define it anyway.

?Hugh Cole
The Pretty Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh Cole on November 16, 2009 at 5:25am

Thank you Gil,
Your complimentary and gracious feedback is deeply appreciated.

Hugh Cole
The Pretty Goodest Hypnotist on the Planet

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Shanks on November 16, 2009 at 6:47am

Hi there.
I have to half-agree with Bob Burns near the beginning of this thread.

I believe that we enter TRANCE all the time, but to be honest, there are many types of this (drug-induced, meditative, watching TV), but there is only ONE trance that is hypnotic. And that is when you are externally hypnotized. In my view hypnosis HAS to be carried out by one person on another. That is the original definition, and I will not be swayed...

Hypnosis can exist seperately from trance. I've seen many cases of people being under hypnosis without being in trance. Any of you who has seen a stage show has seen that too. I have also seen people in a hypnotic trance, which is far more profound than anything besides the drug-induced ones.

In my experience, the critical factor isn't so much "bypassed" as "ignored". As Emile Coue said, in a conflict between intellect and imagination, the imagination will always win. When you have hypnosis, you are communicating with the imagination (subc), so it simply doesn't bother worrying about the critical factor's "opinion"

Here's an example: Lucy and Paul. As you can see, the guy is wide awake, but hypnotised. You can see the struggle when he he tries to use his intellect for his name.

Think of it this way, if we really had a critical factor that truly prevented us harming ourselves, would it be possible for smokers to exist? Or drinkers? Or fast drivers? Or suicide bombers?

Robert

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by GIL BOYNE on November 16, 2009 at 11:21am

Hypnosis has 'real' brain effect


Hypnosis has a "very real" effect that can be picked up on brain scans, say Hull University researchers.

An imaging study of hypnotised participants showed decreased activity in the parts of the brain linked with daydreaming or letting the mind wander.

The same brain patterns were absent in people who had the tests but who were not susceptible to being hypnotised.

One psychologist said the study backed the theory that hypnosis "primes" the brain to be open to suggestion.

Hypnosis is increasingly being used to help people stop smoking or lose weight and advisers recently recommended its use on the NHS to treat irritable bowel syndrome.


This shows that the changes were due to hypnosis and not just simple relaxation

Dr William McGeown, study leader
It is not the first time researchers have tried to use imaging studies to monitor brain activity in people under hypnosis.

But the Hull team said these had been done while people had been asked to carry out tasks, so it was not clear whether the changes in the brain were due to the act of doing the task or an effect of hypnosis.

In the latest study, the team first tested how people responded to hypnosis and selected 10 individuals who were "highly suggestible" and seven people who did not really respond to the technique other than becoming more relaxed.

The participants were asked to do a task under hypnosis, such as listening to non-existent music, but unknown to them the brain activity was being monitored in the rest periods in between tasks, the team reported in the journal Consciousness and Cognition.


In the "highly suggestible" group there was decreased activity in the part of the brain involved in daydreaming or letting the mind wander - also known as the "default mode" network.

One suggestion of how hypnosis works, supported by the results, is that shutting off this activity leaves the brain free to concentrate on other tasks.

Study leader Dr William McGeown, a lecturer in the department of psychology, said the results were unequivocal because they only occurred in the highly suggestible subjects.

"This shows that the changes were due to hypnosis and not just simple relaxation. "Our study shows hypnosis is real."

Dr Michael Heap, a clinical forensic psychologist based in Sheffield, said the experiment was unique in showing brain patterns supporting the theory that hypnosis works by "priming" the subject to respond more effectively to suggestions.

"Importantly the data confirm that relaxation is not a critical factor.

"The limited data from this experiment suggest that this pattern of activity then dissipates (at least to some extent) once the subjects start to engage in the suggestions that follow."

But he said the small study, which needed repeating in other populations, did not prove that people being hypnotised were in an actual "trance".



Robert Shanks said:

Hi there.
I have to half-agree with Bob Burns near the beginning of this thread.

I believe that we enter TRANCE all the time, but to be honest, there are many types of this (drug-induced, meditative, watching TV), but there is only ONE trance that is hypnotic. And that is when you are externally hypnotized. In my view hypnosis HAS to be carried out by one person on another. That is the original definition, and I will not be swayed...

Hypnosis can exist seperately from trance. I've seen many cases of people being under hypnosis without being in trance. Any of you who has seen a stage show has seen that too. I have also seen people in a hypnotic trance, which is far more profound than anything besides the drug-induced ones.

In my experience, the critical factor isn't so much "bypassed" as "ignored". As Emile Coue said, in a conflict between intellect and imagination, the imagination will always win. When you have hypnosis, you are communicating with the imagination (subc), so it simply doesn't bother worrying about the critical factor's "opinion"

Here's an example: Lucy and Paul. As you can see, the guy is wide awake, but hypnotised. You can see the struggle when he he tries to use his intellect for his name.

Think of it this way, if we really had a critical factor that truly prevented us harming ourselves, would it be possible for smokers to exist? Or drinkers? Or fast drivers? Or suicide bombers?

Robert

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Shanks on November 16, 2009 at 5:05pm

I agree with Gil - because it seems that he agrees with me! :-)

Robert

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 7
• Next ›
• Page