Why aren't ALL of you as horrified by this as I am?

Dear fellow H/T members,

Many of you are familiar with my "rantings" about the terrible harm to hypnotism's image done by (many? most?) stage hypnotists. I realize that very few of you agree with me, or at least fail to agree about what can be done to improve this sorry situation. But every once in a while I'm confronted by SUCH a horrific example of the type of "antics" that are being done that I can't help wondering why EVEN those otherwise well-intentioned stage hypnos on this forum don't at least acknowledge how harmful the following kind of tasteless "show" MUST be to the profession:

[from the current blog titled:

A few experiences i've induced in my short time as a recreational hypnotist.

"Then i found him a copper pipe and claimed it was my lightsabre, and that i was a jedi knight. I showed him an on button that didnt exist in reality. He turned it on, and i let him cut off my hand. Later i told him i was a powerfull magician. I could shoot lightningbolts from my fingertips, and proceeded to fry him, he experienced genuine pain, so i stopped.

My next project will be get someone to voulenteer for a post hypnotic hallucination that they poop a living poop that's crawling out of the toilet, and proceeds to tell them "Thank you for giving me life, I am in eternal debt".

Favorite

0 members favorited this

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Richard Nongard - NLPBoard.com on April 14, 2011 at 4:50pm

I am pretty well read. Got your book on amazon a year or two ago when we first started debating. And don't demagogue this- dissent or disagreement is not an insult I just happen to proundly disagree with your world view, and the conclusion
.

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on April 14, 2011 at 6:13pm

No Richard, dissent or disagreement in NOT an insult, but to say that my research is "flawed" is most DEFINITELY an insult, because it implies either dishonesty or incompetence on my part. To say it's "flawed" is actually the worst insult imaginable to a work of scholarship!

Now to say you simply DISAGREE with my world view and/or conclusions is of course perfectly fine with me.

That being said, I don't understand how you could without at least doing your OWN (equally thorough) research into its history, but it really doesn't bother me one way or the other.

But implying (no, not "implying", but actually CLAIMING!!) that I somehow intentionally "falsified" my years of research in order to "prove" some "preconceived" notion is both ludicrous and highly insulting; and even though we may strongly disagree on certain issues, there's no reason why we can't just "agree to disagree" without your resorting to such a mean and baseless personal insult.

I was actually pleasantly surprised to read your post about you're trying to encourage a more ethical form of stage demonstration (which I stated in no uncertain terms), and really expected more from you.

Richard Nongard - NLPBoard.com said:

I am pretty well read. Got your book on amazon a year or two ago when we first started debating. And don't demagogue this- dissent or disagreement is not an insult I just happen to proundly disagree with your world view, and the conclusion
.

Permalink Reply by James Hazlerig - HypnosisAustin on April 14, 2011 at 6:44pm

Saul, my friend,

I don't believe Richard accused you of fabricating facts or falsifying research. He said your research was flawed, and he did not specify in what way. A researcher need not be dishonest or incompetent in order for his research or conclusions to contain flaws.

Over the last several years, we've all observed that you respond to the most outrageous posts on HT--posts such as LTG's blog or a controversial video of a standing instant induction that looked violent--and you respond with a large dose of vitriol, invective, and CAPS LOCK. Before you and I became friends, my disagreeing with you led to some ad hominem attacks against me and accusations of bias on my part. So it appears that certain things get you so worked up that you write in a bit of a rage, and it appears that you may cherry pick which posts you respond to.

So while I have no doubt that spent a great deal of work poring over old tomes, and I've no doubt that you may accurately quote those texts--your posting history here does make me question whether you might have unconsciously cherry picked your sources to support what became your thesis.

Permalink Reply by Richard Nongard - NLPBoard.com on April 14, 2011 at 6:53pm

"CLAIMING!!) that I somehow intentionally "falsified" my years of research"

Now you are putting words into my mouth....

I think your research found what you stated you were looking for. That is it. There were no insults or personal attacks, unless you were looking for them.

Over and out, see you in a few months when we have this conversation again....

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on April 14, 2011 at 7:24pm

James, my friend (who looks somewhat like a pirate?),

It's the fact that Richard claimed that my research was flawed in order to make it conform to some "preconceived notion" that I supposedly started out with, that changed an acceptable "criticism" into an UNacceptable "insult".

Now, there's absolutely no way that I can "prove" that I did NOT start out with any "preconceived notions"....it's simply not possible to deny a negative. So you'll just have to take my word for it that I merely started out with an honest QUESTION (that damned "caps-lock key is sticking again!). But you CAN ask yourself WHY I would possibly WANT to start out with a so-called preconceived notion and then spend 13 years trying to "prove" it? Did I think such a book would make me RICH (PFFFFFT!), or FAMOUS (PFFFFFFT!!)..???

No my friend, I was simply intrigued by the MYSTERY behind hypnotism's (highly) tarnished historical legacy, and upset at the prospect of it having to perhaps endure yet ANOTHER century of LOST-POTENTIAL (caps-lock misfiring again!).

My motives were pure, my intention admirable and POSITIVE, and my research conducted with almost unheard-of fanatical dedication. And all this WITHOUT any financial compensation!!!!!!!!!!!

So you'll forgive me if I get all bent out of shape, and aggravated (o.k., pissed-off would be a more apt description) when I'm confronted by all this NEGATIVITY because some (a LOT of) folks on here don't like the nature of my MESSAGE.

Yep, I can be hotheaded when I feel ganged up on, and am not one of those "touchy-feely" politically correct types that

just smile gently and turn the other cheek. In fact, the vanity license plate on my Mustang GT is "TYPE A", and it's in a frame that reads: "WARNING...CONTENTS UNDER PRESSURE!!!", so that should give you a clue as to why my posts can sometimes (often?) be somewhat confrontational (LOL).

But I MEAN WELL, and my interest is confined to improving the hypnosis COMMUNITY. This has ALWAYS been my one and only goal...!

Remember, I'm (happily!) RETIRED, and whether or not hypnosis advances, or disappears yet AGAIN into the dustbin of history, will have absolutely NO impact whatsoever on MY personal finances.

NONE!!

Anyway, that's about it for me. I think I've devoted (more than) enough time to this thread these past few days, and am looking forward to having my grandaughter visit for the weekend.

If I have any time left over (doubtful), perhaps I'll finally get my !@#%&! caps-lock key repaired....; - )

Peace out.

James Hazlerig said:

Saul, my friend,

I don't believe Richard accused you of fabricating facts or falsifying research. He said your research was flawed, and he did not specify in what way. A researcher need not be dishonest or incompetent in order for his research or conclusions to contain flaws.

Over the last several years, we've all observed that you respond to the most outrageous posts on HT--posts such as LTG's blog or a controversial video of a standing instant induction that looked violent--and you respond with a large dose of vitriol, invective, and CAPS LOCK. Before you and I became friends, my disagreeing with you led to some ad hominem attacks against me and accusations of bias on my part. So it appears that certain things get you so worked up that you write in a bit of a rage, and it appears that you may cherry pick which posts you respond to.

So while I have no doubt that spent a great deal of work poring over old tomes, and I've no doubt that you may accurately quote those texts--your posting history here does make me question whether you might have unconsciously cherry picked your sources to support what became your thesis.

Permalink Reply by Richard Clark MFT on April 14, 2011 at 8:45pm

Ok Folks,

Let's move forward and put those sabers back in their sheaths, OK.

Saul, You can not teach evolution at a Baptists prayer meeting.

EVER!

It's foolish to try. And, always leads to hurt feelings.

Permalink Reply by Saul Rosenfeld on April 14, 2011 at 8:58pm

"Saul, You can not teach evolution at a Baptists prayer meeting.

EVER!

It's foolish to try. And, always leads to hurt feelings."

Richard,

That is SO true, and SO beautifully phrased, that I'm jealous that I didn't think of it myself.......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL...!

Closing this baby down now.

(better late than never...; - )

Saul

Richard Clark MFT said:

Ok Folks,

Let's move forward and put those sabers back in their sheaths, OK.

Saul, You can not teach evolution at a Baptists prayer meeting.

EVER!

It's foolish to try. And, always leads to hurt feelings.