3 ms·

OK, to wrap it up: I'm positing that hypnosis CANNOT force a person to do something that goes against their will. If you have evidence that suggests, or better

OK, to wrap it up: I'm positing that hypnosis CANNOT force a person to do something that goes against their will. If you have evidence that suggests, or better yet proves, otherwise please paste a link. EDIT: lately it's become apparent to me that whenever you ask for citation, people downvote you. People, just because you disagree you don't have to downvote. Just offer some evidence to what you're supporting.

bmh_ca 10y ago
Sorry, I should have posted a link. You are quite right in asking for proof. Here's an excerpt of the declassified MK ULTRA reports released by Freedom of Information Act in 2001 (as well as parts released previously), and printed in Lapham's Quarterly <http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/spies/new-york-state-mind> http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/spies/new-york-state-mind>: > H experimentation, February 10, 1954 > The group of five subjects appeared on schedule. A posthypnotic of the night before (pointed finger, you will sleep) was enacted. Mses. [redacted] and [redacted] immediately progressed to a deep hypnotic state. [Redacted] was then instructed (having previously expressed a fear of firearms in any fashion) that she would use every method at her disposal to awaken [redacted] (now in a deep hypnotic sleep), and failing this, she would pick up a pistol nearby and fire it at [redacted]. She was instructed that her rage would be so great that she would not hesitate to “kill” [redacted] for failing to awaken. > [Redacted] carried out these suggestions to the letter, including firing the (unloaded pneumatic) gun at [redacted] and then proceeding to fall into a deep sleep. After proper suggestions were made, both were awakened and expressed complete amnesia for the entire sequence. [Re- dacted] was again handed the gun, which she refused (in an awakened state) to pick up or accept from the operator. She expressed absolute denial that the foregoing sequence had happened. I believe that counts as doing something against ones will. Lapham had a widely distributed issue titled "Spies", I recall, in which the linked article (or a variant of it) appeared. Here is a Gizmodo article: http://gizmodo.com/project-mkultra-one-of-the-most-shocking-cia-programs-1370236359 http://gizmodo.com/project-mkultra-one-of-the-most-shocking-... and wired: http://www.wired.com/2010/04/0413mk-ultra-authorized/ http://www.wired.com/2010/04/0413mk-ultra-authorized/ There are a lot of other reputable news agencies confirming the same. The NY Times even hosts the exceptionally well written report of the government here: https://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_ProjectMKULTRA.pdf https://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_Proje... There is also the 1999 "based on a true story" called the Sleep Room, which I gather is quite accurate (but obviously not proof in itself). I hope you find the above interesting, if not persuasive, evidence of hypnosis.
- rantanplan 10y ago
  I promise I'll read all of them and get back to you, after a few hours.
- rantanplan 10y ago
  First of all, thanks for the links. I admit I didn't read the 147-page pdf, but I think we can classify it with all the rest, at the same level of "evidence". As far as I can see there's nothing new here, other than the usual super-secret 3-letter agency experiments, full of material for great spy movies but thin on substance or evidence. I think you'd agree that the same quality of evidence is abundant for aliens, area 51 and all that. >I believe that counts as doing something against ones will. Um nope :) Hypnotize someone and instruct them to do some kind of self-harm. Jump off a roof. Shoot themselves or whatnot. It won't happen :D So maybe I wasn't clear earlier. I am aligned with the scientific consensus at this point. And that, at the moment, is that this is hocus-pocus, placebo effect and the usual trait of humans that they need an excuse to justify actions that would usually never do. You know, kinda like "oh no, the alcohol did it!" Maybe we'll have stronger evidence in the future, but right now it's all smoke. Nevertheless, interesting. cheers
  - bmh_ca 10y ago
    Thanks for the reply. People can certainly be compelled to do things they would not otherwise do by what people would ordinarily call hypnosis. The focus on harm brings MK ULTRA to mind. However, a more generic definition is widely documented in the medical literature, see e.g. The Prefrontal Cortex and Suggestion: Hypnosis vs. Placebo Effects. <http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00415/full> http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00... Self-harm may not be possible, as you say. Given the the nature of hypnotic suggestion, I speculate it is possible to suggest a separation of the physical self from the harm, and in that way trick someone into self harm. Particularly when combined with mind-altering drugs like LSD. But I've no evidence other than the reports linked. The MK ULTRA report was read into evidence at Senate hearings because the truth of the report indicated abominable and deplorable practices. Nobody has, in spite of powerful incentives to do so, denied the truth of these reports. That ought to be a compelling indicator, IMHO. Though I did not see an article discussing harm, dozens of articles on PubMed describe the effects of hypnosis (versus placebo). I feel like your standard may be practically unattainable, meaning one must ask: What sort of evidence would convince you?

bmh_ca 10y ago

Sorry, I should have posted a link. You are quite right in asking for proof. Here's an excerpt of the declassified MK ULTRA reports released by Freedom of Information Act in 2001 (as well as parts released previously), and printed in Lapham's Quarterly <http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/spies/new-york-state-mind> http://www.laphamsquarterly.org/spies/new-york-state-mind>: > H experimentation, February 10, 1954 > The group of five subjects appeared on schedule. A posthypnotic of the night before (pointed finger, you will sleep) was enacted. Mses. [redacted] and [redacted] immediately progressed to a deep hypnotic state. [Redacted] was then instructed (having previously expressed a fear of firearms in any fashion) that she would use every method at her disposal to awaken [redacted] (now in a deep hypnotic sleep), and failing this, she would pick up a pistol nearby and fire it at [redacted]. She was instructed that her rage would be so great that she would not hesitate to “kill” [redacted] for failing to awaken. > [Redacted] carried out these suggestions to the letter, including firing the (unloaded pneumatic) gun at [redacted] and then proceeding to fall into a deep sleep. After proper suggestions were made, both were awakened and expressed complete amnesia for the entire sequence. [Re- dacted] was again handed the gun, which she refused (in an awakened state) to pick up or accept from the operator. She expressed absolute denial that the foregoing sequence had happened. I believe that counts as doing something against ones will. Lapham had a widely distributed issue titled "Spies", I recall, in which the linked article (or a variant of it) appeared. Here is a Gizmodo article: http://gizmodo.com/project-mkultra-one-of-the-most-shocking-cia-programs-1370236359 http://gizmodo.com/project-mkultra-one-of-the-most-shocking-... and wired: http://www.wired.com/2010/04/0413mk-ultra-authorized/ http://www.wired.com/2010/04/0413mk-ultra-authorized/ There are a lot of other reputable news agencies confirming the same. The NY Times even hosts the exceptionally well written report of the government here: https://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_ProjectMKULTRA.pdf https://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_Proje... There is also the 1999 "based on a true story" called the Sleep Room, which I gather is quite accurate (but obviously not proof in itself). I hope you find the above interesting, if not persuasive, evidence of hypnosis.

rantanplan 10y ago
I promise I'll read all of them and get back to you, after a few hours.
rantanplan 10y ago
First of all, thanks for the links. I admit I didn't read the 147-page pdf, but I think we can classify it with all the rest, at the same level of "evidence". As far as I can see there's nothing new here, other than the usual super-secret 3-letter agency experiments, full of material for great spy movies but thin on substance or evidence. I think you'd agree that the same quality of evidence is abundant for aliens, area 51 and all that. >I believe that counts as doing something against ones will. Um nope :) Hypnotize someone and instruct them to do some kind of self-harm. Jump off a roof. Shoot themselves or whatnot. It won't happen :D So maybe I wasn't clear earlier. I am aligned with the scientific consensus at this point. And that, at the moment, is that this is hocus-pocus, placebo effect and the usual trait of humans that they need an excuse to justify actions that would usually never do. You know, kinda like "oh no, the alcohol did it!" Maybe we'll have stronger evidence in the future, but right now it's all smoke. Nevertheless, interesting. cheers
- bmh_ca 10y ago
  Thanks for the reply. People can certainly be compelled to do things they would not otherwise do by what people would ordinarily call hypnosis. The focus on harm brings MK ULTRA to mind. However, a more generic definition is widely documented in the medical literature, see e.g. The Prefrontal Cortex and Suggestion: Hypnosis vs. Placebo Effects. <http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00415/full> http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00... Self-harm may not be possible, as you say. Given the the nature of hypnotic suggestion, I speculate it is possible to suggest a separation of the physical self from the harm, and in that way trick someone into self harm. Particularly when combined with mind-altering drugs like LSD. But I've no evidence other than the reports linked. The MK ULTRA report was read into evidence at Senate hearings because the truth of the report indicated abominable and deplorable practices. Nobody has, in spite of powerful incentives to do so, denied the truth of these reports. That ought to be a compelling indicator, IMHO. Though I did not see an article discussing harm, dozens of articles on PubMed describe the effects of hypnosis (versus placebo). I feel like your standard may be practically unattainable, meaning one must ask: What sort of evidence would convince you?