(Close Window)
Topic: Magic is one thing, hypnosis is quite another...
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 3, 2006 11:29PM)
... in fact, it is a very real interfering with the free will of another human being. How many [i]really[/i] know what they are dealing with here? And for entertainment?

Better sticking with magic that creates wonder for the audience WITHOUT causing potential harm to our fellow man...
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 4, 2006 09:51AM)
Rutabaga, I suggest that you do some real research on what hypnosis actually is, with all due respect, as your post sounds like you are buying in to much of the urban myths about the topic.

Hypnosis is a cooperative effort between the hypnotist and the hypnotee, regardless of what it seems like from the audience. It's the degree of cooperation that tends to surprise and fool people in the audence into thinking that hypnosis is really some form of sinister mind control.

Virtually every study done has shown that hypnosis is no such thing, at all. In fact, if a subject is given a suggestion that seriously conflicts with their hard-held beliefs, they will come out of hypnosis and usually express their anger with the hypnotist for trying any such thing, or simply ignore the suggestion!

Some resources I would advise you to take a peek at would include: www,ngh.org, which is the web page of the National Guild of Hypnotists, the largets professional organization of therapuetically-oriented hypnotists in the world, http://www.hypnosis.org and to read Hypnosis For The Complete Idiot by Roberta Temes, which is an excellent and low-cost overview of the field, written by a Certified Hypnotherapist.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 4, 2006 10:42AM)
Thank you Mr. Darrow for your reply. You are very correct when you say I am ignorant as to the actual workings of hypnosis, and I am sure following the links provided will allow me to become better informed about science's current undertanding of hypnosis. However, my point is that the deeper effects of hypnosis trancend what science can currently understand in other words, that science itself is ignorant as to the actual workings [and therefore consequences] of hypnosis.

Science history illustrates many instances of harmful "dabbling" with as-yet-unknown forces, the folly of which only became clear when science had progressed to a better understanding of the principles in question.

Obviously, you have a right to your opinion, and I appreciate that there are many others who agree with you. I post this simply so others who may be tempted to pursue hypnosis [either for entertainment or therapy as hypnotist or hypnotee] may be informed that alternative views on the use of the practice exist.
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 5, 2006 01:18AM)
While I respect your right to your opinion, and would defend to the death your right to state it, I respectfully state that an opinion held in ignorance of the facts is an opinion that should be supported BY facts before it is relied on by anyone.

Science is very clear on what hypnosis is capable of doing and what it is not capable of doing. We have over 2,000 years of work on that and over 400 years of reliable, scientific methodological research of good quality (as opposed to phenomenological reports that were what was available prior to that) that supports my stance.

Science is also ignorant of the actual workings of asprin on the body's system, but the outcomes are FULLY understood. The same applies to hypnosis. No doctor can tell you how asprin alleviates a headache - just that it does and with a rudimentary understanding of the biochemical changes in the body. But they cannot tell you how it acts to alleviate a headache, because the full mechanics of some headaches are not fully understood as yet, either.

From a biomedical standpoint, science actually understands MORE about the neurophysiology, psychological and pharmacological effects of hypnosis than we do about the same as regards asprin. Would you then, using the same logic, ban asprin?

Science also does not know how gravity is created, just that it exists and its effects. Neither does science understand the mechanics of imagination. Do I need to go on?

Mere mechanics aren't always as important as the effects and limitations of something. And hypnosis, while a potent tool for change and an interesting method of entertaining others as well, is SEVERELY limited in its scope of effects, as has been demonstrated innumerable times, under replicable conditions, worldwide.

Please forgive my bluntness, but forming an opinion about something without a good understand of the topic strikes me as something to be avoided.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 5, 2006 09:30AM)
Yea what he said!!!!


Wow Lee very elequant and correct and quite frankley stated in a way that won't get me banned for 30 days!

short form here, Lee is very right.

Research research research, at least I read that someplace.

do more research from BOTH ponts of view so at least if you form an opinion contrary to others, which by the way can easily be supported also, you will have the ability to defend it with some facts.

It is easy to have opinions about things we have no clue, heck at least where Lee and I am writing from it is America and we are entitled to such things, but it makes more sense to educate yourself a little more when you hold strong opinions!
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 5, 2006 12:32PM)
Gentlemen,

Thanks for your replies. But I restate my position:the deeper effects of hypnosis trancend what science can currently understand in other words, that science itself is ignorant as to the actual workings [and therefore consequences] of hypnosis.

Hypnotism interferes with the FREE WILL of the one hypnotised, and is something the range of which one can only overlook to a very limited degree, and the final effect of which is not yet known!
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 5, 2006 08:36PM)
Rutabaga my friend do some more research if you would please

hypnosis in NO way interferes with the free will as you have said.

you should know that ALL HYPNOSIS IS SELF HYPNOSIS!!!

read that as many times as it takes to sink in.

you are showing a complete lack of understanding and have no real standing to even be asking the questions. please research some more for us
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 6, 2006 01:29AM)
What he said.

All hypnosis is self hypnosis. This is not only a maxim in the field, it is demonstrable scientific FACT.

There is no interference with free will in hypnosis, in fact, there is noticeably LESS interference with free will in the hypnotic state than there can be in the so-called "normal waking state!" See the studies done by Stanley Milgrom back in the late 60's, if I recall correctly, where psychology students were coerced into believing that they were giving other students increacingly higher and more painful levels of electric shock. In the normal waking state, they would take the shocks well into the levels that the meters stated were fatal.

In the hypnotic state, ALL the volunteers, in the replicated studies at Stanford and University of Chicago (Fromm & Schorr), REFUSED to do so and came out of hypnosis, spontaneously, which is something a hypnotized subject can ALWAYS do, regardless of the level of trance. See Hilgard and Hilgard's classic The Experience of Hypnosis for details on that - it's the culmination of over 50 years of university research in hypnosis at Stanford, where they headed the program.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: dan parker (Jan 6, 2006 02:36AM)
I agree with the previous speakers, there is no way to break the free will, but there are ways to fool the free will, depending on the given suggestions...

dan parker
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 6, 2006 03:22AM)
Science itself still has difficulty explaining vision and hearing let alone the more complex aspects of the mind.

If you want real arguments then see here. http://www.sciammind.com

Apart from that, your position is very weak and ill informed. You would do better by asking about modern ADVERTISMENTS and how they control your actions. Much more sinistar then your assumptions.
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 6, 2006 08:01AM)
Gentlemen,

In order to state whether or not hypnotism interferes with the free will of a human being, one would need to fully understand exactly what the free will actually is. Do you have that knowledge?
Message: Posted by: Scotty Mac (Jan 6, 2006 03:14PM)
Rutabaga,

Have you had a negative experience with hynosis that leads you to your opinion? I think that might help with understanding your perspective. Is your main point that you are opposed to the use of hypnosis as entertainment or hypnosis in general?

Scott
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 6, 2006 06:31PM)
Rutabaga writes. [b]"... in fact, it is a very real interfering with the free will of another human being."[/b]
Then he writes...
[b]"Gentlemen, In order to state whether or not hypnotism interferes with the free will of a human being, one would need to fully understand exactly what the free will actually is."[/b]

Shot yourself in the foot sir.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 6, 2006 07:35PM)
Rutabaga you just lost your entire point and all credability. glad others have actual knowlege at least to refer too close to your misguided impressions
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 6, 2006 11:35PM)
Partizan,

My statements reflect my confidence in MY understanding of what the free will actually is. I am simply asking now if others have a similar understanding, as it is a prerequisite to fully understanding my point.

Scott, I have no personal experience of hypnotism, good or bad, but I personally am opposed to hypnotism in general for the reason stated above. Current scientific knowledge of hypnotism is limited to the bounds of science itself to that which is empirically measurable. The free will of which I speak trancends these limits, therefore obviously science is unable to survey the interfering I am refering to.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 7, 2006 08:56AM)
Rutabaga if your cat had kittens in the oven and you called them "biscutus" because it is YOUR understanding still dosn't make it right now does it?

I don't care how much "confidence" you have in this understanding it is still wrong. Anyone who has a similar understanding is also wrong and therefore to try to understand your point would make them understand a WRONG point.

People always crow "I am entitled to my opinion", and indeed you are. BUT with all due respect you are NOT entitled to it being correct.

Research more and develop an "educated" opinion. That is my, and I am pretty sure Lee's although I am not certian, opinion.

You remind me of those groups who automatically condem something even before they have researched it properly. You for example have listened to Urban Legends and myths to form what you feel is a scientific opinion and in reality it is the furthest thing from the truth.

Please simply actually educate yourself more and I feel you may be suprised. How can you be "opposed" to anything without any real knowlege?
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 7, 2006 09:14AM)
I always thought 'free will' was a campaign to get William Rice released!
Now I understand thanks too Rutabaga and his wriggling. ;) xxx
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 8, 2006 06:46PM)
Rutabaga, my understanding of "free will" may well be different than yours, so please, enlighten all of us as to what YOUR definition is, so that we are all on the same page. We all know that presuppositions are the bane of any discussion and I do not want to make any of those, which I may have been guilty of in my earlier posts, so please, by all means, let us know what your definition of "free will" is so that we can all discuss this as rational, adult individuals.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 8, 2006 07:44PM)
I am always pleased when someone can add a phrase like "the bane of any discussion"

Especially since Bane was one of my favorite named Batman villians.

THANKS Lee.

It is one of those words I can understand but not really define. I know what people mean my it but can't really use it myslef.

sorry for that little insight into my meager mind, so rutabega....

What he said!
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 9, 2006 10:43PM)
Mr. Darrow,

Most people today regard the free will as something brought into being by the earthly brain when the intellect [which is bound to space and time] indicates a certain definite direction for thoughts.

However, that is not free will, but the will bound by the earthly intellect!

As I said previously, free will trancends the material, has no connection with the physical body or brain its origin lies in the spirit of man.

As spiritual beings, each of us is responsible for his own actions, and must reap the reactions accordingly. But the laws of justice decree that where such responsibility exists, there must also unquestionably be a possibility to make a free decision! And only the person who follows his spirit, his conscience, in making these decisions is exercising true free will.

Any action which would hinder such a free will, such as addictions [whether to drugs, alcohol, sex, money etc.], complete choking of or disregard for the conscience, or indeed hypnotism, which reaches out beyond the physical and binds the free will of the one hypnotized, results in the hindering of the human spiritual development, the consequences of which must return to impact both hypnotist and hypnotee!

Mr. Darrow, I don't expect you or others on this forum to agree with these writings. I offer them not for debate, but for those who might otherwise become involved in matters beyond their understanding, and who might yet be spared the consequences. All others may go their own way.
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 10, 2006 03:52AM)
Rutabaga, with all due respect: in one breath, you claim that you have no knowledge of how hypnosis works, yet in your last post, you claim that hypnosis "which reaches out beyond the physical and binds the free will of the one hypnotized, results in the hindering of the human spiritual development, the consequences of which must return to impact both hypnotist and hypnotee!"

I have to ask you, in all fairness to yourself and to this forum, how you can possibly support that argument when you have clearly admitted that you have no idea as to how hypnosis works?

You are claiming knowledge about something that you have admitted that you have no knowledge about.

Forgive me, but you cannot have it both ways, so please, for the sake of MY sanity, if nothing else, explain how you resolve that mutually exclusive set of concepts in your own mind.

Here is what you have stated:

Premise: I know nothing about hypnosis or how it works.

Second Premise: I know that hypnosis works by: (it) reaches out beyond the physical and binds the free will of the one hypnotized, results in the hindering of the human spiritual development, the consequences of which must return to impact both hypnotist and hypnotee!

These are mutually exclusive concepts. You cannot claim to know nothing about how something works and then claim to know how it works - but this is exactly what you have just done in your last post.

Lastly, all hypnosis is SELF hypnosis. The hypnotist is NOT a CONTROLLER, but a guide. There is no "binding of the will or spirit." That, my friend is urban myth and legend and refuted by literally every medical and psychological experiment and text available today. The hypnotee has the ability and, indeed is fully able to terminate the session AT ANY POINT he or she CHOOSES.

Obviously, you missed that in our earlier discussions, the references that have been cited and in Psychology 101, if you have taken it yet.

Hypnosis is a PURELY COMMUNICATIVE PROCESS. It does not involve "spiritual energies," or "odic influences," or "chi, prana, mana, ki," or any of the other mystical nonsense that Hollywood and the New Age movements would have the public believe. It is based solely on to people COMMUNICATING with each other and engaging the IMAGINATION and the EMOTIONS to achieve a MUTUALLY AGREED-UPON GOAL.

Now, please, unless you can resolve this dichotomy of how you can know nothing about how hypnosis works and yet claim to know how hypnosis works, do some substantive research on the topic - read some of the actual university level works done on the topic so you will have a better understanding of the mechanics of hypnosis.

Those works will explin the process, affect and effect of hypnosis far better than any of us could in a short forum post in here.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 10, 2006 09:06AM)
Mr. Darrow,

What I have said is "I am ignorant as to the actual workings of hypnosis". This is not the same as being unable to survey the <i>consequences</i> of hypnosis. I might be ignorant as to the actual workings of gravity, but I understand the consequences of jumping off a cliff---

Please note I also said "science itself is ignorant as to the actual workings <b>[and therefore consequences]</b> of hypnosis. <b>The reason science is ignorant to the consequences of hypnosis is because, as I have said repeatedly, the true effects of hypnotism extend beyond the material, beyond scientific understanding.</b> The limits of intellectual understanding are firmly set at the boundary of gross matter. Only the human spirit is capable of absorbing more. If you are one of those who would deny the existence of the spiritual, then I have no more to offer you. Those with an more open outlook, and who are able and willing to discuss these things objectively, I would encourage to PM me.

Mr. Darrow, I thank you for your input, and for your civil manner. I now consider this topic closed.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 10, 2006 09:19AM)
Closed? you spout ignorance and myth and we who use this to feed our families are supposed to consider it closed?

sorry bud but let me help you.

You may understand the concequences of jumping off a cliff,BUT you are speaking of the gravity equivilant of "which falls faster,a pebble or a boulder, THIS part of gravity you are ignorant and can NOT apply your cliff theory.

there are many many different nuances to this discussion and you stick to ONE part and try to apply it to others.

NOW topic closed
Message: Posted by: magickdabid--uk (Jan 10, 2006 12:48PM)
Shame its closed, just getting interesting, kinda reminded my of the Richard Dawkins program I watched the other night, He had to deal with Blinkered religous dogma too!.

Lee, Danny, found your posts most enlightning.........

Rutabaga, mate, were all here in the business of entertaining and fooling people, but you're fooling yourself, badly......very badly, take a goooood long look at your magical history, these "spiritual things" that have taken control of "your free will" have been used by magicians in one guise or another since the dawn of time, but pleeeese don't take my word for it, do the home work yourself and claim the inheritance we mystics have been left!.


Dave
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 10, 2006 01:22PM)
The problem is he seems done with homework. this is what they mean when they say a "little" bit of knowlege is a dangerous thing.

he has is opinions and regardless of anything he is determined to stick to them.
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 10, 2006 02:14PM)
I think rutabaga has less of an idea about what free will is then he does about hypnosis.

The subduing of free will is the basis of all moral regimes and one that you may all be familiar with in your own country.

Hypnosis could be thought of as negation of free will inhibitors for the purpose of clear communication. (could).

With free will this planet would be a nasty and mercenary world.
Message: Posted by: magickdabid--uk (Jan 10, 2006 03:39PM)
The subduing of free will is the basis of all moral regimes and one that you may all be familiar with in your own country.



New Labour?

Free Will......just another illusion to keep us sweet!.

Dave
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 11, 2006 05:02AM)
:)
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 11, 2006 02:03PM)
[quote]
On 2006-01-10 10:06, rutabaga wrote:
Mr. Darrow,

What I have said is "I am ignorant as to the actual workings of hypnosis". This is not the same as being unable to survey the <i>consequences</i> of hypnosis. I might be ignorant as to the actual workings of gravity, but I understand the consequences of jumping off a cliff--- [/quote]

Actually, I am not sure that you do. Firstly, you have not described any of these "consequences" that you have been going on about. Please describe them. At that point, the matter MIGHT come to some form of closure. Until that point, the matter is far from over.

[quote]
Please note I also said "science itself is ignorant as to the actual workings <b>[and therefore consequences]</b> of hypnosis. <b>[/quote]

Sorry, but once again, you contradict yourself. You state that the consequences are observable, yet you state that "science," whomever that might be, is in ignorance of them. That would imply that "science" has overlooked something that is patently obvious. I sincerely doubt that "science" would make such an obvious omission. If it is observable, it has been observed. Many men and women in science are people of Faith.

Nice try, but your spin on that angle fails.

[quote]
The reason science is ignorant to the consequences of hypnosis is because, as I have said repeatedly, the true effects of hypnotism extend beyond the material, beyond scientific understanding.</b> The limits of intellectual understanding are firmly set at the boundary of gross matter. Only the human spirit is capable of absorbing more. If you are one of those who would deny the existence of the spiritual, then I have no more to offer you. Those with an more open outlook, and who are able and willing to discuss these things objectively, I would encourage to PM me.[/quote]

You presume quite a bit about me. And an intellectual understanding of matters spiritual being impossible is one of them. See St. Augustine, for openers, Buddha for another and Martin Luther for another. If you want to go another few rounds on that, I'd be happy to oblige.

So far, you have made some serious inferences, but no actual claims as to the possible damage hypnosis can do. You infer that it "strangles" spiritual growth in some fashion, yet you fail to tell us how, especially as you refuse to describe how hypnosis acts on that level and especially as you readily admit that you have NO understanding as to how hypnosis works.

You cannot have it both ways, as I stated, before.

This is an open discussion and you have brought up ome very interesting ideas. To walk away from them just when they are getting to the points of the argument seems to be saying that either A: you cannot really defend your position and are running away from the discussion or B: you have no intent of doing any research as you have no intention of even attempting to learn something, but are simply trying to foist your beliefs off on the rest of the group for your own reasons, whatever they may be or C: you are simply looking to put forth a religious recruiting program of your own, which you know is against Caf' policy and do not want to run afoul of the rules on that.

So, in the spirit of openness, put forth your argument and let's discuss it like civilized people, instead. You might learn something. So might we.
[quote]
Mr. Darrow, I thank you for your input, and for your civil manner. I now consider this topic closed.

[/quote]

I'm sorry that you feel this way and hope that you will bring your position and ideas back to the group at large for more discussion. It was just getting interesting. Please understand that no one was ganging up on you, but we were all trying to help you to understand that you appear to be laboring under a set of long-held myths that have been floating about the religious and spiritual communities for decades and which have NO support in Scripture or other holy texts at all, nor do they have any support in any of the clinical literature, whatsoever.

And thank you for your kind words as well.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
cc to rutabaga, by PM
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 11, 2006 02:23PM)
Ruti'
That cliff...

1 meter or 1000 meter drop?
Onto land or into water?
With or without deceleration aid?
On this planet or another?
In this reality or another?

You claim to know the consequence of jumping from a cliff yet you fail to define the conditions of the jump.
This seems to be the logic you follow in your arguments.

Sorry to seem cold but that's how you make me feel.
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 12, 2006 12:42AM)
Partizan, I cc'd him on my response and, so far, no reply. My feeling is that he was looking for an excuse to put forward a religious agenda and, when we didn't rise to the bait in here in the way he expected, but, instead, pointed out the fallacies in his logic (or lack thereof), he bolted.

However, time will tell.

With luck, he will come back as this was starting to get very intersting!

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 12, 2006 05:56PM)
What he said
Message: Posted by: Daniel Santos (Jan 12, 2006 09:02PM)
[quote]
On 2006-01-05 02:18, Lee Darrow wrote:
While I respect your right to your opinion, and would defend to the death your right to state it...

[/quote]

...and now you know what happens when you mess with a philosophe ;-).
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 12, 2006 11:13PM)
<quote>… in the spirit of openness, put forth your argument and let's discuss it like civilized people, instead. You might learn something. So might we</quote>

Mr. Darrow,

You have posted some sincere and fair questions.

<quote>… you have not described any of these "consequences" that you have been going on about. Please describe them. At that point, the matter MIGHT come to some form of closure. Until that point, the matter is far from over</quote>

I disagree. I have said plainly, “… hypnotism, which reaches out beyond the physical and <i>binds the free will of the one hypnotized, results in the hindering of the human spiritual development.</i>”

<quote>You state that the consequences are observable, yet you state that "science," whomever that might be, is in ignorance of them. That would imply that "science" has overlooked something that is patently obvious. I sincerely doubt that "science" would make such an obvious omission. If it is observable, it has been observed. Many men and women in science are people of Faith</quote>

The consequences are indeed observable <i>spiritually</i>. I have already defined “science” as “that which is empirically measurable”, and the limits of intellectual understanding as “firmly set at the boundary of gross matter”. Science does not therefore possess the ability to observe the consequences in question. Whether one has “faith” or not does not change this in any way. <b>That which is beyond gross matter cannot be measured by gross matter</b>

<quote>You presume quite a bit about me. And an intellectual understanding of matters spiritual being impossible is one of them. See St. Augustine, for openers, Buddha for another and Martin Luther for another. If you want to go another few rounds on that, I'd be happy to oblige</quote>

Perhaps I should be more clear. An intellectual <i>experiencing</i> of matters spiritual is impossible. An intellectual understanding of the <i>interpretation</i> of this experiencing certainly is possible. These are subtle but important distinctions.

<quote>…you have made some serious inferences, but no actual claims as to the possible damage hypnosis can do. You infer that it "strangles" spiritual growth in some fashion, yet you fail to tell us how, especially as you refuse to describe how hypnosis acts on that level and especially as you readily admit that you have NO understanding as to how hypnosis works</quote>

I have clearly said that hypnosis binds the free will of man, which consequently hinders spiritual progress. This is serious damage. I <i>have</i> said that "I am ignorant as to the actual workings of hypnosis". This means that I cannot survey the complete process – from its beginnings in the material to its effects in the ethereal. I have also said that <i>science itself</i> has limited understanding of how hypnosis works, and this is so because of the material limits of scientific understanding. Hypnosis transcends the material, and works on an <i>ethereal</i> level. Unless a practitioner is fully familiar with the sphere to which all that he uses belongs, he cannot be called qualified. And he who knows the ethereal sphere <i>would never make use of hypnotism</i> as long as he desires what is best for his fellow men. To go into more actual details on this would require a thorough understanding of the connections and principles of life, nature, creation – call it what you will – that lie both within and beyond the world of matter. An in-depth discussion of that nature is very much beyond the scope of this forum.

<quote>… either A: you cannot really defend your position and are running away from the discussion or B: you have no intent of doing any research as you have no intention of even attempting to learn something, but are simply trying to foist your beliefs off on the rest of the group for your own reasons, whatever they may be or C: you are simply looking to put forth a religious recruiting program of your own, which you know is against Café' policy and do not want to run afoul of the rules on that</quote>

A: Without going into very much more detail, not appropriate for this forum, as stated above, I have given as much as I am able to this discussion. There was no intention of “running away”. B: Correct. What science knows of hypnotism is piecemeal, and I have no interest in wallowing in a quagmire of intellectual gropings. C: Neither am I seeking converts, adherents or religious recruits. As I have clearly said, I offer this simply for those who might otherwise become involved in matters beyond their understanding, and who might yet be spared the consequences.

<quote>Please understand that no one was ganging up on you, but we were all trying to help you to understand that you appear to be laboring under a set of long-held myths that have been floating about the religious and spiritual communities for decades and which have NO support in Scripture or other holy texts at all, nor do they have any support in any of the clinical literature, whatsoever.</quote>

I am well aware that I am “in the lion’s den”, and many here have much invested in hypnotism. However, my position is <i>not</i> informed by myths, nor does it draw from scripture or so-called holy books, but is firmly based on simple and natural laws which are as real as any science uses today.

Mr. Darrow, you are obviously an educated and respected man of much talent, and your dedication to your field is admirable. I don’t for a minute doubt your goodwill and sincerity. I have replied to your posts as openly as possible within the confines of the forum, and hope I have clarified to some extent your questions.
Message: Posted by: Partizan (Jan 13, 2006 09:10AM)
It would seem that you know less about the spirit then you do about free will and hypnosis.

I have no idea what you are trying to say. Next you will bring the soul into the argument with even less aptitude then your previous attempts.

It seems too me that your 'spirit' has wondered down some blind alley and is trying to convince itself and us that it is not lost!

Perhaps with some hypnotherapy you may be guided to a font of understanding that has so far illuded you.

Speaking as a free and unencumbered spirit I find your views very narrow and clouded. Perhaps you should let go of some of that baggage and join the rest of us.

Oh, and please learn to use the quote format correctly. [quote]Oh, and please learn to use the quote format correctly.[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 13, 2006 10:49AM)
You do seem to REFUSE to be educated mr. rutabega

you make wide sweeping arguements, you make accusations and things like strangling spirituality when in reality hypnosis is not about control.

as stated ALL HYPNOSIS IS SELF HYPNOSIS. somewhat like meditation. can you then argue that meditation "strangles" the spiritual growth>?

No you can not. The other thing to keep in mind that hypnosis is more about taking control of your own mind and turning that mind lose! it is NOT about hindering people or strangling anything.

you indeed have some age old ideas which caused people to be burned to death in Salem not too long ago.

You adhere to old myths legends and fear of what you don't understand and instead of finding out what it is you don't know you insist on seemingly less of an understanding than when you started.

Don't read what we write,there is PLENTY of scientific research on the subject that is independent. Not all supports our side mind you but read it with an open mind and you will be shocked with what you end up with.

I know you BELIEVE you are right. BUT as I said you can tell me you don't "believe" in Newtonian Physics, but guess what you are still subject to its laws now arren't you?
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 16, 2006 04:18AM)
[quote]
On 2006-01-13 00:13, rutabaga wrote:
<quote>… in the spirit of openness, put forth your argument and let's discuss it like civilized people, instead. You might learn something. So might we</quote>

Mr. Darrow,

You have posted some sincere and fair questions.

<quote>… you have not described any of these "consequences" that you have been going on about. Please describe them. At that point, the matter MIGHT come to some form of closure. Until that point, the matter is far from over</quote>

I disagree. I have said plainly, “… hypnotism, which reaches out beyond the physical and <i>binds the free will of the one hypnotized, results in the hindering of the human spiritual development.</i>?
[/quote]

I disagree. You have made a baldfaced statement and are requriring the rest of us to accept it as fact, yet you do not describe what thie "binding of the spirit and hindering of the growth" entails, nor what the results are. Sorry, but that does not wash.
[quote]
<quote>You state that the consequences are observable, yet you state that "science," whomever that might be, is in ignorance of them. That would imply that "science" has overlooked something that is patently obvious. I sincerely doubt that "science" would make such an obvious omission. If it is observable, it has been observed. Many men and women in science are people of Faith</quote>

The consequences are indeed observable <i>spiritually</i>. I have already defined “science? as “that which is empirically measurable?, and the limits of intellectual understanding as “firmly set at the boundary of gross matter?. Science does not therefore possess the ability to observe the consequences in question. Whether one has “faith? or not does not change this in any way. <b>That which is beyond gross matter cannot be measured by gross matter</b>[/quote]

Circular argument. You are stating that even those people of Faith, because they are also believers in science, cannot see that which is plainly visible to them through their Faith. Sorry, but you cannot have it both ways. If that were true, there would be a faction in the scientific community that would be striving to prove this stance of youre, just as there is one supporting "intelligent design."

Spin fails.
[quote]
<quote>You presume quite a bit about me. And an intellectual understanding of matters spiritual being impossible is one of them. See St. Augustine, for openers, Buddha for another and Martin Luther for another. If you want to go another few rounds on that, I'd be happy to oblige</quote>

Perhaps I should be more clear. An intellectual <i>experiencing</i> of matters spiritual is impossible. An intellectual understanding of the <i>interpretation</i> of this experiencing certainly is possible. These are subtle but important distinctions.[/quote]

Thank you for proving my point above.
[quote]
<quote>…you have made some serious inferences, but no actual claims as to the possible damage hypnosis can do. You infer that it "strangles" spiritual growth in some fashion, yet you fail to tell us how, especially as you refuse to describe how hypnosis acts on that level and especially as you readily admit that you have NO understanding as to how hypnosis works</quote>

I have clearly said that hypnosis binds the free will of man, which consequently hinders spiritual progress. This is serious damage. I <i>have</i> said that "I am ignorant as to the actual workings of hypnosis". This means that I cannot survey the complete process – from its beginnings in the material to its effects in the ethereal. I have also said that <i>science itself</i> has limited understanding of how hypnosis works, and this is so because of the material limits of scientific understanding. Hypnosis transcends the material, and works on an <i>ethereal</i> level. Unless a practitioner is fully familiar with the sphere to which all that he uses belongs, he cannot be called qualified. And he who knows the ethereal sphere <i>would never make use of hypnotism</i> as long as he desires what is best for his fellow men. To go into more actual details on this would require a thorough understanding of the connections and principles of life, nature, creation – call it what you will – that lie both within and beyond the world of matter. An in-depth discussion of that nature is very much beyond the scope of this forum. [/quote]

Forgive me, but that is a cop out. You state that someone who does not know everything about how something works is not truly qualified. Well, when one gets right down to fundamental levels of matter, gravity and even certain functions of thermodynamics, there is LOTS that NO ONE understands. Therefore, by your logic, no one is qualified in anything.

You are evading the point of the issue. What specific harm comes to an individual from the experience of hypnosis?

I can quantify a large number of positive results that are easily replicable and verifiable in the entire population. Can you say the same - no - or you would have done so, as you admitted that an intellectual understanding of matters spiritual IS possible. Your own points have pricked your argument's balloon and popped it, I'm afraid.
[quote]
<quote>… either A: you cannot really defend your position and are running away from the discussion or B: you have no intent of doing any research as you have no intention of even attempting to learn something, but are simply trying to foist your beliefs off on the rest of the group for your own reasons, whatever they may be or C: you are simply looking to put forth a religious recruiting program of your own, which you know is against Café' policy and do not want to run afoul of the rules on that</quote>

A: Without going into very much more detail, not appropriate for this forum, as stated above, I have given as much as I am able to this discussion. There was no intention of “running away?. B: Correct. What science knows of hypnotism is piecemeal, and I have no interest in wallowing in a quagmire of intellectual gropings. C: Neither am I seeking converts, adherents or religious recruits. As I have clearly said, I offer this simply for those who might otherwise become involved in matters beyond their understanding, and who might yet be spared the consequences. [/quote]

Consequences which you have yet to even define and still refuse to. Forgive me, but that does seem like a pretty reasonable definition of evasion.
[quote]
<quote>Please understand that no one was ganging up on you, but we were all trying to help you to understand that you appear to be laboring under a set of long-held myths that have been floating about the religious and spiritual communities for decades and which have NO support in Scripture or other holy texts at all, nor do they have any support in any of the clinical literature, whatsoever.</quote>

I am well aware that I am “in the lion’s den?, and many here have much invested in hypnotism. However, my position is <i>not</i> informed by myths, nor does it draw from scripture or so-called holy books, but is firmly based on simple and natural laws which are as real as any science uses today. [/quote]

How can you make the assertion that you "are not laboring under any myths" when you also have admitted that you have NO understanding of the workings of hypnosis at all?! As I stated, clearly, you cannot have it both ways - they are mutually incompatible views.
[quote]
Mr. Darrow, you are obviously an educated and respected man of much talent, and your dedication to your field is admirable. I don’t for a minute doubt your goodwill and sincerity. I have replied to your posts as openly as possible within the confines of the forum, and hope I have clarified to some extent your questions.
[/quote]

Sorry, but you have not. Contrariwise, you have really shown that you still hold to a contradictory set of views: "I have no idea of how hypnosis works and no understanding of its mechanics" and "I know that it binds and ties the spiritual growth of a person" which I contend one cannot KNOW for a fact without knowing the mechanics of - appearances CAN be deceiving after all!

Until such time as you can resolve that contradiction, this matter is an exchange which will bear little fruit, I fear.

Respectfully,

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 16, 2006 12:16PM)
Mr. Darrow,

[quote]You have made a baldfaced statement and are requriring the rest of us to accept it as fact, yet you do not describe what thie "binding of the spirit and hindering of the growth" entails, nor what the results are. Sorry, but that does not wash.[/quote]

I require no one to accept anything blindly! I ask only for an unbiased and LOGICAL consideration of what I am offering. Surely you do not expect me to provide scientific facts proving the existence of that which is beyond science?


[quote]You are stating that even those people of Faith, because they are also believers in science, cannot see that which is plainly visible to them through their Faith. Sorry, but you cannot have it both ways. If that were true, there would be a faction in the scientific community that would be striving to prove this stance of youre, just as there is one supporting "intelligent design."[/quote]

Faith alone does not automatically grant spiritual understanding. And those WITH spiritual understanding would NEVER attempt to prove spiritual matters scientifically, as [i]these are two different species![/i]

[quote]You state that someone who does not know everything about how something works is not truly qualified. Well, when one gets right down to fundamental levels of matter, gravity and even certain functions of thermodynamics, there is LOTS that NO ONE understands. Therefore, by your logic, no one is qualified in anything.[/quote]

Interaction and understanding of the material world is [i]natural[/i] for human beings within it who have developed the ability to do so. Matter, gravity and yes, even certain functions of thermodynamics, are a part of the material world.

Interaction and understanding of the [i]spiritual[/i] world is [i]natural[/i] for human beings who are within it and have developed the ability to do so.

[quote]What specific harm comes to an individual from the experience of hypnosis?[/quote] I have answered repeatedly: the binding of the free will and subsequent hindering of spiritual maturity!

[quote]I can quantify a large number of positive results that are easily replicable and verifiable in the entire population. Can you say the same - no - or you would have done so, as you admitted that an intellectual understanding of matters spiritual IS possible. Your own points have pricked your argument's balloon and popped it, I'm afraid.[/quote]

Again I must clarify: A direct intellectual understanding of matters spiritual is IMPOSSIBLE. However, an intellectual understanding of the [i]interpretation[/i] of [i]spiritual[/i] experiencing certainly is possible [i]for those who have developed the ability[/i].

[quote]Consequences which you have yet to even define and still refuse to. Forgive me, but that does seem like a pretty reasonable definition of evasion.[/quote]

I have already stated the consequences, repeatedly - the hindering of spiritual maturity.

[quote]How can you make the assertion that you "are not laboring under any myths" when you also have admitted that you have NO understanding of the workings of hypnosis at all?! As I stated, clearly, you cannot have it both ways - they are mutually incompatible views.[/quote]

To labor under any myths, I would be required to be [i]aware[/i] of the myths, which I assure you I am not. I am informed by spiritual realities beyond the scope of this forum. Those interested may PM me, others may go their own way.
[/quote]

[quote]...you have really shown that you still hold to a contradictory set of views: "I have no idea of how hypnosis works and no understanding of its mechanics" and "I know that it binds and ties the spiritual growth of a person" which I contend one cannot KNOW for a fact without knowing the mechanics of - appearances CAN be deceiving after all![/quote]

Mr. Darrow, you are mired in an intellectual swamp. "Appearances CAN be deceiving" applies to the [i]intellect[/i] only. In the spiritual, all deception is impossible.

[quote]...this matter is an exchange which will bear little fruit, I fear.[/quote]

Here I must agree. This topic deals with the [i]spiritual realities[/i] of hypnostism. As I said previously, for those who would deny the existence of the spiritual, then I have no more to offer. Those with an more open outlook, and who are able and willing to discuss these things objectively, I would encourage to PM me.
Message: Posted by: magickdabid--uk (Jan 16, 2006 01:57PM)
I'm confused......"existence of the spiritual?" Spiritual what?

Dave
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 16, 2006 02:05PM)
Dave,

I'm referencing the spiritual as the essence of man, and spiritual maturity as the purpose of life. My expanations rest on the existence of spiritual life beyond physical matter.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jan 16, 2006 02:19PM)
Then your arguements have NO merrit, for science can NOT deal with matters beyond the physical universe now can it?

you want to use science as some sort of measuring stick when convienent, but abandon it when it is no longer usefull.

you can make no factual references to the "spiritual self" because they can not be qualified or quantified. your making philisophical arguements at best. all of which have nothing to do with hypnosis I may add.

you seem to be putting forth a "religious" arguement in sheeps clothing.
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 16, 2006 03:33PM)
Rutabaga states: [quote] Mr. Darrow, you are mired in an intellectual swamp. "Appearances CAN be deceiving" applies to the intellect only. In the spiritual, all deception is impossible.[/quote]

Odd, I thought that deception in the spiritual realm was what happened all the time between the forces of Light and Dark, Good and Evil. See the various failed doomsday cults for some really great examples for starters - or the Shakers.

No swamp there at all. And you are quoting me out of context. My context was that you are making your judgement based on your observations alone, without understanding the mechanics of WHAT you are observing and THAT is flawed logic.

"To the uninitiated, any sufficiently advanced science will appear as magic." - Arthur C. Clarke

We are discussing this on a forum on a board that is dedicated to magicians and magic. In magic, it may appear that someone reads someone else's mind, or that they bend a spoon or other metal object with their mind - but the appearance is NOT what happens - even though there are MANY who believe on a spiritual level, that this is exactly what happens - even after they have been SHOWN that the spoon was bent on the edge of the table while their eyes and/or minds were distracted! Or that they simply WANTED to believe.

Remember Dunninger's most famous Quote? "To one who believes - no explanation is necessary. To one who disbelieves, no explanation is possible."

So to say that in matters spiritual all deception is impossible is to state an absurdity. In point of fact, the most common spiritual deception is self deception - buying in to the false teachings of those who claim to know that which they really do NOT know, but who have a good line of bull and who can back it up with quotations used selective instance out takes from whatever religious texts they decide to use. See David Koresh, Jim Jones and Om Shin Rikyo (the nice folks who put nerve gas in the Tokyo subway because it was the "spiritual thing to do") for proofs, again.

This is NOT to say that religion is wrong, not in the slightest. My own religious beliefs are strongly and deeply held and, while I cannot prove them scientifically, they also do not run counter TO science, either.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." -- Albert Einstein

You admit to ignorance of your OWN myths, yet do not look to see what myths you might be operating under by educating yourself as to the factual and scientific realities of how something like hypnosis actually works - denying that this information could possibly be useful to you in your search for knowledge, even though it IS knowledge in and of itself.

"If the mechanics of a thing preclude that thing from performing in a given manner, then the thing cannot accomplish what has been claimed of it." - Design Theory 101 - University Press This is a basic premise of ANY design.

Yet you refuse to look AT the design, looking only at what you see, through the filters of the preconceptions that you have already stated that you have about hypnosis.

You have yet to define your terms and have used what is called "weasle words" to try to avoid dealing with the logical flaws in your premise as well. You have not defined "spiritual maturity," nor have you defined the operation of the term "the binding of the free will" to any extent, either, in spite of my repeated requests for clarification. Nor have you stated the consequences of this supposed "binding," if one is released from it when hypnosis is terminated, whether it is ongoing, even if the hypnotee has only one session, without post hypnotic suggestions, or dealt with any of a hundred other variables that come into question with regards to your allegations.

These terms are what are known as nominalizations - names for things that have no meaning until they are defined. You seem to be using these terms the way a propagandist does - to incite high emotions and negative responses from people. Americans, especially, value their freedoms, and such "loaded language" has been used before to incite some very ugly responses in our country - the Red Scare of the 1950's, the Japanese Internment during WWII, the near-total genocide of the Native American Peoples, just for openers, come to mind.

So please - define your terms in detail, not just in more nominalizations, like "spiritual maturity as the purpose of life," state your proof sources and let's move this into a more productive intellectual area of debate.

Personally, I am open to the discussion, as you may have noted, but your premises are still on very shaky grounds from a logic standpoint, to say nothing of a linguistic one.

Lee Darrow, C.H.
Message: Posted by: magickdabid--uk (Jan 16, 2006 04:18PM)
Rutabaga,
thanks for your response, please continue.......

" I am informed by spiritual realities"..... Where do these come from?, & who or what is passing them on to you?


Dave
Message: Posted by: rutabaga (Jan 16, 2006 10:37PM)
Mr. Darrow,

[quote]I thought that deception in the spiritual realm was what happened all the time between the forces of Light and Dark, Good and Evil. See the various failed doomsday cults for some really great examples for starters - or the Shakers.[/quote]

You thought wrong. Deception, darkness, evil, cults and Shakers all exist in spheres [i]below[/i] the spiritual. A knowledge of the laws and structure of creation would demonstrate the absurdity of your assertion. Sorry to be so blunt.

[quote]My context was that you are making your judgement based on your observations alone, without understanding the mechanics of WHAT you are observing and THAT is flawed logic.[/quote]

I am making NO judgments, only observations of the [i]consequences[/i] of hypnotism, which are clear to me.

[quote]to say that in matters spiritual all deception is impossible is to state an absurdity. In point of fact, the most common spiritual deception is self deception - buying in to the false teachings of those who claim to know that which they really do NOT know, but who have a good line of bull and who can back it up with quotations used selective instance out takes from whatever religious texts they decide to use. See David Koresh, Jim Jones and Om Shin Rikyo (the nice folks who put nerve gas in the Tokyo subway because it was the "spiritual thing to do") for proofs, again.

This is NOT to say that religion is wrong, not in the slightest. My own religious beliefs are strongly and deeply held and, while I cannot prove them scientifically, they also do not run counter TO science, either.[/quote]

I say again: in matters spiritual, all deception [i]is[/i] impossible! In addition, those who depend on others for their spiritual welfare, in the form of ready made opinions or beliefs, will either succumb to spiritual slumber or worse, or will be rudely awakened by circumstance to the realities of their situation.

What I say here does not run counter to science in fact, as scientific knowledge progresses, it will [b]reinforce[/b] my comments.

[quote]You admit to ignorance of your OWN myths, yet do not look to see what myths you might be operating under by educating yourself as to the factual and scientific realities of how something like hypnosis actually works - denying that this information could possibly be useful to you in your search for knowledge, even though it IS knowledge in and of itself.[/quote]

I admit no such thing! There is knowledge of the world of matter [science], and there is [i]experiencing[/i] of that which transcends it. I have no interest in scientific gropings about subjects which are beyond its reach. These things can only be grasped by that of the [i]same species[/i], the spiritual.

[quote]You have yet to define your terms and have used what is called "weasle words" to try to avoid dealing with the logical flaws in your premise as well. You have not defined "spiritual maturity," nor have you defined the operation of the term "the binding of the free will" to any extent, either, in spite of my repeated requests for clarification. Nor have you stated the consequences of this supposed "binding," if one is released from it when hypnosis is terminated, whether it is ongoing, even if the hypnotee has only one session, without post hypnotic suggestions, or dealt with any of a hundred other variables that come into question with regards to your allegations.

These terms are what are known as nominalizations - names for things that have no meaning until they are defined. You seem to be using these terms the way a propagandist does - to incite high emotions and negative responses from people. Americans, especially, value their freedoms, and such "loaded language" has been used before to incite some very ugly responses in our country - the Red Scare of the 1950's, the Japanese Internment during WWII, the near-total genocide of the Native American Peoples, just for openers, come to mind.

So please - define your terms in detail, not just in more nominalizations, like "spiritual maturity as the purpose of life," state your proof sources and let's move this into a more productive intellectual area of debate.[/quote]

I have purposely been using very general terms to convey my position in the most simple way. There is no attempt at clever intellectual manipulations to try and convince those who might be vulnerable to such things. Perhaps the simplicity of my communication is viewed with suspicion in an intellectual environment.

However, the scope of what you ask for is beyond this forum. Assertions and doubts as to my intentions have already been made or inferred, and I have no wish to incite them further. I am simply raising awareness of this issue for those who might hear. Any further details are best left for a more private discussion. I am available through PM for those so inclined.
Message: Posted by: mota (Jan 17, 2006 10:13AM)
Rutabaga,

You forgot to warn us about the boogey man...
Message: Posted by: Lee Darrow (Jan 18, 2006 04:15AM)
Rutabaga wrote:
[quote] Deception, darkness, evil, cults and Shakers all exist in spheres below the spiritual. A knowledge of the laws and structure of creation would demonstrate the absurdity of your assertion. Sorry to be so blunt. [/quote]

Really? Not according to them, nor to their interpretation of Scripture, nor to their Divine Inspiration, so I have to ask you - where does YOUR understanding come from?

[quote] I am making NO judgments, only observations of the consequences of hypnotism, which are clear to me.[/quote]

Again, from here, it certainly looks different that how you are seeing it. Your first post was a pretty clear warning to steer clear of hypnosis as it posed a spiritual danger. That, my friend, is a judgement call.

[quote] I say again: in matters spiritual, all deception is impossible! In addition, those who depend on others for their spiritual welfare, in the form of ready made opinions or beliefs, will either succumb to spiritual slumber or worse, or will be rudely awakened by circumstance to the realities of their situation.

What I say here does not run counter to science in fact, as scientific knowledge progresses, it will reinforce my comments. [/quote]

If one posits a spiritual side to the world, which I certainly believe in, then the possibility exists for deception OF the spirit. This has been proven time and again, especially by the self deception, made by the person who fully believes that he or she has found the Truth - only to find out that they were dead wrong.

I submit that YOU could very well be in such a place. Pride goeth before a fall and your post certainly shows more than a bit of pride - or, at least hubris in that you do not seem to be able to admit that you MIGHT be wrong in your observations.

"No one's eyes are so clouded as he who truly believes that he has found the One True Way." - Bahal'ua. (and yes, I know I spelled it wrong - look at the hour...)

With regard to weasle words and avoiding defining the actual "threat" that you perceive, you responded thus:

[quote] I have purposely been using very general terms to convey my position in the most simple way. There is no attempt at clever intellectual manipulations to try and convince those who might be vulnerable to such things. Perhaps the simplicity of my communication is viewed with suspicion in an intellectual environment.

However, the scope of what you ask for is beyond this forum. Assertions and doubts as to my intentions have already been made or inferred, and I have no wish to incite them further. I am simply raising awareness of this issue for those who might hear. Any further details are best left for a more private discussion. I am available through PM for those so inclined.[/quote]

In other words: "I won't answer." No assertion is being made about your motivations whatsoever other than this - in an honest debate, definition of terms is de rigeur.

Also, your assertion that you are "raising awareness of this issue" is a non sequitur simply because you have failed TO define those very terms and failed to define the actual "threat" that you have been going on about.

Your position is untenable at this point.

Quod Erat Demonstratum.

However, I thank you for taking the time and effort involved in this exchange.

Lee Darrow, C.H.