It comes from an NLP perspective. However there are a few directions from NLP. A few good resources are self hypnosis audios from Stephen Brooks and his indirect suggestion audio set is also excellent. If you can get a hold of any old Bandler's taped hypnosis seminars. The old ones 20 years or more old are far superior to his new stuff in my opinion. Also any of the audios or video programmes from Ross Jeffries are also excellent.

Apart from that good NLP Training to masterprac level or above but it is very pricey these days. The Steve Brooks stuff is a good place to start and if I remember they were quite resonable. Any books on hypnosis by bandler are great. Transformations being one of his most well known. Anything by Tad James....I don't remember where I got a lot of the stuff in my head its just an accumulation...

Now looking at all the above I think I should write a single unifying book of what is in my head.

Aaaaaaarrrrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!
Tony has said he was NOT in Trance. I believe him.
I have performed hypnosis with appxox 40 - 50 people within the last 4 weeks and without quoting percentages I simply cannot prove, I'd say that based on my own experience of trancework, many of them were IN hypnosis but evidently NOT in any form of trance.
Therefore I do not agree with MP's definition that: 'hypnosis is the process of guiding natural trance'. Understand I'm neither saying it's NOT. I am saying that it CAN be.
And THAT attitude (that it CAN be) allows me the freedom to learn from just about everyone.
My advice? The minute you believe you KNOW what this IS you become incapable of learning. That's a fact by the way. Ask anyone who majored in philosophy.

I may have been hasty in dismissing social compliance, the people I´ve hypnotized complied consciously at least at the start.
my apologies.

Hello and thanks for all teh responses.

So, what is a trance? If we are not normally in a trance and then in hypnosis we are, how can we tell that they are in a trance instead of just pretending?

If we are always in a trance of some form or another and simply move from whatever trance into a hypnotic trance, how can we tell the switch has occurred?

What I want to know is, can we define the word trance so that we all know what it means?

Thanks

HK

One of the better posts we get in here. A sign of learning and moving on, stronger, fitter and sharper, possessing more knowledge.
This is exactly what this particular forum should be all about. Well done Owen. I hereby re-name you: 'UNLEASHED McGINTY'!!!
The Scottish Spaniards have always been my favourites.

You can tell when you have switched trance everything "looks" different. Now reading bobs post he said they were in hypnosis but not in trance. I believe what he meant was that they were not displaying the physiology commonly associated with a "trance". In otherwords they didn't have their eyes closed or slumped forwards. This is a common misconception that you need to display these behaviours to be in trance. Being relaxed eyes closed and deeply relaxed is one type of trance.

You have five senses. Without these senses you would cease to exist. These senses record information onto your hard drive (unconscious mind). We then respond in the real world dependant upon on the content and how that content is organised on the hard drive. There is verly little conscious control over behaviour even although we think we have conscious control in general we don't.

Our senses can operate by seeing hearing or feeling stimuli from the external world. You can read this type for example; you can see the screen hear the processor of the computer and feel the keys on the keyboard while you type.

~But you can also hear my voice picture my face and expressions; hear the "tone" of the conversation and in some cases feel the anger;laughter or whaterver you would feel if yu were having a realtime conversation with me. You can also create constructs. For example you could look across the room and imagine someone you know standing there. You could if you wished right now hear your favourate track in your head.

Your mind is very talented. All a trance is - is when all those senses cross over from external to inside. Say a lion walked into your room. All yoursenses would be external in fact you would be very aware of what was happening you would be very conscious. Compare that with replaying a great night out you had whilst driving. You ever drove a few miles and have no recollection of getting there?

that's natural everyday trance. Eyes wide open appearing to fully "conscious" but you were in an altered state or trance.

Now the thing is our senses overlap continuously. Depending how things are organised in our hard drives we will project some of our past experiences in to the present. So if you had a bad traumatising experience you might project it onto the current situation for example so every thing looks bleek. that's an an example of a negative everyday trance. You might not see solutions staring you in the face because what you are "seeing, hearing and feeling" partly is projected distotred from inside.

And that's how it goes on we are constantly overlapping senses moving from one trance to another. Projecting on to reality dependant upon how our hard drives are currently set.

All hypnosis is the process of focusing and giuding these senses or trances in a specific direction for a specifif out come.

Whether that be sticking someones hand to a table or creating new sales records for a large company to persuading the country to vote a certain way to mass marketing products.

The thing is because we are constantly overlapping external and internal senses hypnosis or trance is never a stable state.

Another example of awakened trance or altered sate would be when a marathon runner runs through the pain barrier and feels no pain.

Happy to agree with much of MP's excellent post. However, Helen Keller would probably giggle at the quote: "You have five senses. Without these senses you would cease to exist".
She was deaf, blind and dumb possessing a very poor sense of smell. But I still take his point in that experiences which we take on and add to our hard drives are relayed to us through those senses. BUT it has been argued for some time now that we have other senses.
Just as a throw-away,[ some of you might wish to know that in sociology it is considered that 'common sense' does not exist.

Helen Keller still had senses - how do you know your blind deaf or dumb?

And its common sense that common sense doesn't exist.

The answer to the first question is: "You don't".
And if common sense did not exist then it could not be used to recognise it's non-existence. You 'bampot'!.... (please take that the way it's intended)

If you have NO senses you don't exist was my original statement...She had some senses or she would be nothing. Whatever life she had it was very limited because of her lack of the main ones.

And of course your so clever to point out the "common sense" statement Duh!!!!

Proves one thing if it did exist you would have been short changed at birth..

Nasty man!!!
Anyway, another day and you're wrong again.
It absolutely possible to live without any sense. Indeed some would argue that YOU are the very man to prove that (ROTFFLMAO)

Seriously you would live but undoubtedly you would be in a comatose form. Unless of course you were a sponge (Wow! Is this YOU again?) which of course has no senses that we know of. It just sits and waits for bacteria to come and attach itself to it (wow, everything happens in threes huh? Spooky!).

Look, seriously, I'm not getting any pleasure from any of this.

No you wouldn't exist if you had no senses how could you? A sponge must sense bacteria or how could it attach it to itself? Duh!!!

Its the opposite with me I'm trying to detach myself from bacteria...

Theres a lot of it on here.

There is no commonsense is common sense among sociologists which doesn't mean its common elsewhere where its commonsense that it does exist...however its commonsense to assume its not commonsense eveywhere else..

Right, **** it!

So, back to the plot.

MP's post was interesting. However, I have two questions. First, is this the accepted use of the word trance? When you place someone in a hypnotic trance, is that the same use of the word? Second, is that use of the word trance useful? It appears to just describe normal life; I have heard the 'we are always in some kind of trance', but doesn't that undermine the hypnotic trance as causing hypnotic things to happen?

What I mean is, when hypnotised, people can do some crazy things that they wouldn't do when not hypnotised. If they are always in a trance and hynosisi is no different, then trance can not be a characteristic of hypnosis and hypnosis can not rely on trance in order to work.

So, how does it work?

HK

"Hypnosis" (for the lack of a better term) works for the same reason that money is valuable. Money is valuable because the government says it is and we believe it is. Same with hypnosis. You say it will work and the person believes you.

This is as good an explination as you will find that will not cause a HUGE debate. I am not being flippant.

Look at what soldiers do in battle? Ordinary guys taken off the streets and "conditioned" do crazy things. What are crazy things? What you really mean is they do things not regarded as normal behaviour. Look at religeon some pretty crazy stuff goes on because of religeon a trance that is conditioned over a period of time.

Hypnosis is the process of guiding, hijacking trance and leading it where you want it to go. A trance is really what you believe to be reality and what you are unconsciously anchored into seeing feeling and behaving at any moment in time.

that's the definition that allows you to do the most with hypnosis. Which can and does gets some amazing results.

Hypnosis has NO value its what can be done with it that has the value. If all you ever want to do is stick a hand to a table then you don't even have to consider the definition above.

Just in this thread alone MP has made the following statements about trance.

"Isn't social compliance just a fancy term for trance?
Trance itself is something a litle more subtle.

We live in a trance.
Trance is never a stable state
Trance that is conditioned over a period of time

He is in a problem "trance"...This all a trance is.
I deal in designer trances. That's what trance really is.

These are all trances we go in and out of trance by the very activity of being on here.

Its all about trance.

Hypnosis is the process of guiding natural trance.
Trance is natural constant and always present.
You switch one for another.

What many hypnotists think of as hypnosis or a trance is really just a doorway a bridge from one trance to another..
You can tell when you have switched trance everything "looks" different.

All a trance is - is when all those senses cross over from external to inside.
You were in an altered state or trance.

Trance that is conditioned over a period of time

Now looking at all the above I think I should write a single unifying book of what is in my head".

If the above is helping you form a coherant view of how hypnosis works good for you. I find them incoherant and incompatible with each other. Liberate yourself. Do not to be a trance junkie. Just say no to this flim flam and jibba jabba. Trance is a romantic idea but it is not necessary to get an understanding of how hypnosis works.

Anthony

What is it you find incoherant Ant? It seems perfectly clear to me. Then again perhaps you just spend most of your time sticking hands to a table. maybe you should look up and around you once in a while...


My first Golf programme started last week. After the FIRST session one of the delegates went out and played his lowest scores in 30 years playing golf. His best game by far in 30 years.

What is a coherant "view" of hypnosis? One that takes old concepts renames them and then tries to make simple hypnotic stunts like sticking a hand to a table complicated or revolutionary? In order to sell them to magicians.

Is that a coherant view? Or is it just a simple model that you can and your target market can grasp?


Trance may be a romantic Idea in your model of the world. It is certainly not in mine. Trance is the current configration of "reality" experienced in a moment in time.

That's what enables me to get those kind of results consistently...

I think having intellectual ideas and over valuing crude and primitive hypnotic stunts while selling them to magicians and believing your own hype is more of a romantic notion don't you?...

If sticking hands to tables and stealing cuecumbers is what you are in to then I guess you are right. Its your reality. Its not mine.

Im not surprised you find my view incoherant...

And yes one day I might write a book to unify whats in my head. My view complete view which you won't get in a few posts. Seriously what is it you are having difficulty in grasping? I don't see any incompatibility. It makes perfect sense.

It makes even more sense to my clients that get the results..

I've always thought that if you put ten hypnotists in a room and ask them how or why hypnosis works, you'll get at least 15 answers.

I don't know how the distributor or oxygen sensor work in my car. I know it costs way too much to fix them.

However, even though I don't know how they work, I know how to use my car. It can help get ill people to a hospital faster than a horse cart. It can save me time by getting me from one place to another faster than if I were walking. I'm glad that my car works.

So we can read any of dozens of books, each giving different responses to your question, or saying that hypnosis doesn't exist at all. We can stay here and debate it.

Or we can learn to use it to entertain or to help people change their behaviors and improve their health.

I prefer the latter.