Chapter 3
Is Hypnosis the Answer?
Dr. George Estabrooks, professor of psychology at Colgate University and
author of the book, _Hypnotism_, made the following two statements in a
paper called "The Future of Hypnosis" given as part of a program on "The
Nature of Hypnosis" at the annual meeting of the American Psychological
Association in 1959:
"It would be well to sound a word of caution against certain attitudes
which have become prevalent and which can be well illustrated in the
field of medicine. In this respect, direct suggestion is under the ban.
For example, a dictum, 'Never remove the symptom unless the cause is
understood,' is much emphasized. Its validity is greatly open to
question, since much of medical practice is direct symptom removal, as
only a little thought makes apparent.
"Another dictum generally followed is that the unconscious background of
symptom-complexes must necessarily be made conscious to effect a cure.
Reasonable and thoughtful consideration of the extensive role of the
unconscious in daily living and functioning renders this dictum much
less creditable."
I should like to discuss both of these statements in some detail as they
invariably arise in the mind of the individual seeking help through
hypnosis.
The first thought that comes to mind is that all the religious healings
cited in the Bible involve direct symptom removal. The cures that are
effected by religious devotees traveling to sacred shrines are also in
the realm of direct symptom removal. I have yet to hear a criticism of
this type of treatment directed at religious leaders or condemnation of
the religious shrines. These cures are accepted as evidence of the power
of faith or attributed to the super-natural. In these cases, nothing is
ever done to make the person cured understand the nature of the
unconscious mechanisms which contributed to his problem.
Religious healing cannot be dismissed by merely saying, "It isn't
scientific." A methodology is only scientific when it works. It is of no
value if it doesn't help the individual seeking help. We must face the
fact that not all people can be helped by the same psychological
treatment. We can readily see this in the following extreme example: An
aborigine suffering from a psychological problem certainly wouldn't be a
candidate for psychoanalysis as we know it. He could, no doubt, be
helped much more readily by a witch doctor. It also stands to reason
that the sophisticated Westerner would not be influenced by the
incantations of a tribal medicine man.
Going further, we find there are many schools of psychotherapy and many
approaches to solving man's emotional problems. The cure rate for all of
them, however, is approximately the same. I think we must accept the
fact that there is no _one_ sound, logical, scientific approach. I
believe that so long as the end result is achieved, the methodology was
scientific for that individual's needs. The goal of all therapies is to
help the patient free himself from whatever emotional problems beset
him.
This approach, to some readers, may seem an oversimplification of a very
complex problem, but I think it's time that we had a simple, workable
formula devoid of technical jargon. Too often, complex technical terms
and theories have been glibly used to explain away failures. I believe
we need more and more emphasis on measures to make the patient feel
better rather than spending most of the time trying to find out why he
doesn't feel well. This, of course, is symptom removal again.
I should like to point out an interesting fact pertaining to Biblical
healers. So long as the fame of the healer preceded his arrival in any
country, he was able to heal the sick. However, where his fame as a
healer was either unknown or discredited, he found no faith and
subsequently no cure. The earliest reference to hypnosis is in the
Bible, Genesis ii, 21. "And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall
upon Adam, and he slept ..."
Dr. William Malamud, 86th president of the American Psychiatric
Association, in an address delivered at the annual meeting in 1960,
stated the following in a paper called "Psychiatric Research: Setting
and Motivation":
"During the last few years we have witnessed a growing trend of
overemphasizing the value of 'exact' methodology and uniformity of
standards. This trend, which could be characterized as a 'cult of
objectivity,' has already had an important influence on psychiatric
research. It is true that in its emphasis on critical judgment and valid
criteria, it has helped to curb unrestrained flights of imagination and
sloppy methodology. But the overglorification of objectivity and the
insistence on rigidly single standards of acceptable methods have
resulted in a concentration on certain phases of the science of human
behavior at the expense of other very important ones."
I believe that most individuals have a fairly good understanding of how
they came to have the problem that they have. I have yet to encounter
the person who protests he has no idea why he doesn't function as he
would like to in a certain area. From a practical standpoint, not many
have the time nor money required to delve into the unconscious
background of the problem. The high cost of treatment is a very real
objection and cannot be discounted lightly. People suffering from
emotional problems usually suffer financial reverses as well. Who is to
help these people? There are very few places in the country where they
can receive competent psychiatric help at a reasonable fee. Is there
this type of help in your own community? It is only when the individual
is destitute that the state provides whatever help it can. However, at
this point it's a long hard struggle back to good emotional health.
The National Association for Mental Health and its affiliates issue
about 10 million copies of 200 different pamphlets on various aspects of
mental health. To assess the value of these pamphlets, 47 mental hygiene
experts held a conference at Cornell University. A report on this
outstanding conference has been published. It is called "Mental Health
Education: A Critique." A feature by Ernest Havemann in the August 8,
1960 issue of _Life_ contains a very worthwhile article on this
conference called "Who's Normal? Nobody, But We All Keep On Trying. In
Dissent From 'Mental Health' Approach, Experts Decry Futile Search For
An Unreal Goal." The following paragraph is taken from the _Life_
article:
"What about psychiatry and psychoanalysis? This is a different matter.
Many unhappy and problem-ridden people, though by no means all who have
tried it, have profited from psychotherapy. Indeed, all the mental
health pamphlets, as a postscript to the self-help methods they
advocate, wind up by advising the reader to seek professional care if
his problems are serious enough. But the skeptics at Cornell cited
statistics which to them show that psychiatric treatment is as remote
for the average person as a trip to the moon. Aside from the expense,
which most people would find prohibitive, there simply are not enough
therapists to go around. The U. S. has around 11,000 psychiatrists and
10,000 clinical psychologists--in all, about one for every 8,500
citizens. If everybody with emotional problems decided to see a
psychiatrist, the lines at the doctors' offices would stretch for
miles."
I assume that most readers of this book know that state hospitals are
understaffed and unable to provide proper care for the mentally ill.
Mike Gorman, executive director of the National Mental Health Committee,
has written a crusading report on this very theme called _Every Other
Bed_. In this book he tells us that every other hospital bed in the
United States is occupied by a mental case. Mental illness costs the
country two and a half billion dollars a year besides the more important
untold human suffering that can never be equated in dollars. The book is
a shocking story of how we have let this happen; are still letting it
happen; and of how little, for the most part, we, the general public as
well as the medical and psychological professions, are doing to correct
this deplorable situation.
It is time that we re-examined the dictums that say a symptom can never
be removed unless the cause is understood and the unconscious background
of symptom-complexes must be made conscious and understood before a
cure is effected.
There are many positive thinking groups functioning in the religious
field. Many of these religious groups are in existence primarily because
of the dynamic philosophy or psychology they offer for every day living.
Couple this with a strong faith in God, and you have a combination which
approaches infallibility. Recently we have had a series of best-selling
books which expound this very theme. Does it work? Of course it does
when used properly.
You can be sure that there has been criticism of this religious
psychology. The criticism is that the basic causes of the problem are
never dealt with and the unconscious conflict is not resolved. It's the
same argument over and over again. What about the people helped? They
seem to have made tremendous strides and are leading lives as well
adjusted as anyone else. Once imbued with this spirit or feeling of
well-being, it permeates every phase of their relationships in a
constructive manner. The only reason that there isn't more criticism is
that this type of psychotherapy is incorporated into the religious
tenets of these groups, and criticizing another man's religion makes the
detractor's entire philosophy unacceptable. I am strongly in favor of
these groups because I would prefer having a religion that keeps
pointing out the positive side of life and that "life can be beautiful"
if you put your faith in God and practice positive thinking. It is
certainly better than the cynical philosophy of its detractors or the
grim religions which stress punishment. Think of the guilt feelings
involved in the latter. No one can live up to such a formidable creed.
Of course, if you suggest to positive thinking, religious individuals
that they are using a form of self-hypnosis, they will emphatically
deny and debate the issue. Since we are primarily interested in mental
hygiene and not in winning a debate, it is well to leave the matter as
it stands. The point to keep in mind is that so long as a person feels
that this methodology is the answer to his needs and so long as no one
is being hurt by his belief, I feel he should cling to his conviction.
He should not allow it to be destroyed by those who are thinking in
different semantic terms.
I would like to bring up another common example pertaining to the two
basic concepts that we have been discussing. It is the example of the
many individuals who have taken public speaking courses to overcome
stage fright. In most cases, the person involved hasn't had too much
opportunity to be a public speaker. Because of this, he suddenly feels
he may not say the right thing or forget what he wants to say. This
anxiety can create the very situation or block that he fears. What is
the solution? Certainly not psychoanalysis to find out why he functions
the way he does. You could use this approach, but I don't think it's the
most constructive one. It is like asking, "What am I doing that's
wrong?" instead of "What can I do that's right?" The most constructive
approach is to take a course of instruction to get the actual practice
and experience in the techniques of public speaking.
Before proceeding further, I believe it is necessary to point out that I
am not just being critical of the convictions of other sincere and
dedicated individuals engaged in the field of mental hygiene. It is
always good to re-evaluate our present thinking on any subject, no
matter how sincere or convinced we may be that what we are doing is
correct. At times, we can become so immersed in our convictions that we
cannot take criticism and respond emotionally to ideas or
interpretations that do not coincide with logical thinking.
What, then, is the answer to mental health problems? There is no single
answer. It is a very complex situation. There are many promising drugs
and treatments which, if adequately developed and widely used, could do
a great deal toward promoting good mental health. Fundamentally, the
problem will always be that of trying to understand human behavior and
helping those in distress with an efficacious formula.
What is that formula? I believe hypnosis can contribute in part to the
answer. Needless to say, hypnosis is contraindicated in many emotional
problems because of the very nature of the problem itself. Some
emotional difficulties must first be worked out on a conscious level.
After this, hypnosis can be instrumental in achieving the final goal.
Dr. Frank S. Caprio, a prominent psychiatrist, in his book, _Helping
Yourself with Psychiatry_, states the following: "A whole new world of
self-confidence and positive living is open to every person, young and
old, through hypnosis, self-hypnosis and self-suggestion or
auto-hypnosis."
Recommended Resources http://astiro.cohypnosis.hop.clickbank.net
mardi, septembre 8
A PRATICAL GUIDE TO SELF-HYPNOSIS
Chapter 2
What About the Dangers of Hypnosis?
One of the objections that you hear to hypnosis is that it can be
dangerous in the hands of those not trained in the psychodynamics of
human behavior. Inasmuch as psychiatrists and clinical psychologists are
the only ones who are thoroughly trained in the analysis of human
behavior, this objection, if valid, could limit hypnosis to a
comparative handful of therapists. Fortunately, it is not valid. This
was proved several years ago when the "Bridey Murphy" craze gripped the
country. Despite the fact that thousands of amateur hypnotists were
practicing hypnosis, little or no harm resulted. I have personally
instructed several thousand medical and non-medical individuals and have
yet to hear of a single case where a crisis was precipitated or anything
of a dangerous or detrimental nature occurred as a result of hypnosis. I
have also taught several thousand persons self-hypnosis and can report
the same findings.
Many patients who seek treatment from competent psychiatrists,
psychoanalysts and psychologists do not always obtain satisfactory
results. This doesn't mean that everyone should stop seeking help from
these specialists. Even a specialist doesn't have a perfect record of
successful therapy.
What then is the objection to hypnosis? The theory that if you get rid
of one symptom another symptom will take its place really holds no truth
and is usually advanced by those who have had little or no experience in
the hypnosis field. However, a difference of opinion does exist even
with those practicing hypnosis in this area. Some hypnotists "trade
down" symptoms by replacing a serious symptom with a minor one, while
others just remove the symptom. The latter is what a doctor does when he
recommends aspirin for arthritis. He knows the aspirin will not cure the
arthritis, but he wants to alleviate the symptom. To say that another
symptom will replace the pain is unscientific--and untrue. The same is
true of hypnosis.
Lewis R. Wolberg, M.D., clinical professor of psychiatry, New York
Medical College, recently canvassed 30 experts in the field of hypnosis
and found a few who felt symptom removal was "irrational, temporary--or
outright dangerous." The large majority, however, "employed symptom
removal where indicated, and minimized or ridiculed any possible bad
effects."
A further objection to hypnosis is that the results are temporary as
well as symptomatic. It is well to remember that most medical therapy is
specifically directed to symptom removal. How permanent is most medical
treatment? Once you couple hetero-hypnosis with self-hypnosis, you
afford the patient the opportunity of utilizing suggestions for his own
benefit any time they are needed. This, of course, can make symptom
relief permanent. As an example, I would see no harm in teaching a
patient self-hypnosis for symptomatic relief from a problem of insomnia.
It would certainly be better than physically depressing the higher brain
centers with sleeping pills to produce unconsciousness every night. I
needn't tell you that millions of dollars are spent every year on
sleeping pills and patients become dependent upon them, needing more and
more pills in order to produce sleep. Many accidental suicides stem from
an overdose of sleeping pills. Yet, despite the inherent dangers of
sleeping pills which are glaringly apparent, they are prescribed by the
millions, to say nothing of those that reach the market through illegal
channels. Furthermore, how much effort is really made to get the patient
off the sleeping pills? There are also more voluntary suicides by
sleeping pills than by any other method. Perhaps if these drugs weren't
so readily available, many of these unfortunate individuals would be
with us today.
What about the often-quoted statement that "you might do some damage"?
Let's explore this area. I assume that the reader is somewhat familiar
with the work of Emile Coue or at least has heard of his famous
autosuggestion formula of "Day by day, in every way, I'm getting better
and better." During our time, thousands upon thousands of seemingly
helpless and hopeless cases have been cured by repeating this
affirmation over and over again, day after day, as the individual falls
asleep.
I think we should make it clear that whether we call it autosuggestion,
positive thinking, meditation, yoga, affirmations or self-hypnosis, we
are, in reality, talking about the same thing. All require certain basic
prerequisites before they will work effectively for the individual.
We'll discuss these prerequisites in the next chapter.
What should be remembered is that the suggestions are being filtered
into the subconscious mind which does not question, doubt, analyze or
dispute the efficacy of these beneficial thoughts. You can be sure that
the constant repetition will have its effect. Hasn't the mind, in the
past, accepted the individual's diagnosis when he said, "I'm sick," "I
have an inferiority complex," "I can't stop smoking," "I can't lose
weight," "I can't concentrate," "I can remember a person's face, but I
can't remember names," "I have a difficult time falling asleep," "I just
can't seem to relax." Isn't such an individual, in effect, using
self-hypnosis? And hasn't the person convinced himself of the validity
of his present state? This is truly dangerous. It is negative hypnosis.
The question that I raise is: "Why shouldn't the subconscious mind be
even more convinced and respond strongly to suggestions which are in
conformity with the natural desire to be of sound body and mind?" I have
never been able to find a logical answer.
I think this is what happens many times. A person seeks help with a
problem which, in reality, has nothing to do with hypnosis. His cure is
not contingent on being hypnotized or on suggestions he or the hypnotist
feel are indicated. You will read in nearly every book and article
dealing with hypnosis that "hypnotism is not a cure-all." No one has
suggested or implied that it should be used exclusively for all
emotional problems. You may read a newspaper article warning about the
"dangers" of hypnosis. It may tell of a person who rid himself of one
symptom and developed another in its place. You usually get a grossly
distorted picture of what happened, with many aspects of the case not
included. It's a matter of taking what you want to prove out of
context. Propagandists use this technique all the time to get across
their message. It's the old story of telling a half truth.
Honest criticism and a sincere difference of opinion are always welcome.
But criticism must be well-founded from a scientific point of view and
not stem from an emotional reaction. You have probably heard the remark,
"I won't let anyone hypnotize me." What are they really saying, and what
does hypnosis represent to such an individual? To them, hypnosis
represents some sort of "magic spell" which invokes a state of complete
helplessness and dependency upon the hypnotist. We previously discussed
how this erroneous conception can take place because of the manner in
which hypnosis is usually interwoven with bizarre fictional stories.
For many, the hypnotic state represents a period in which the conscious
guard is dropped. They feel they may compulsively reveal the darker side
of their nature, confess their hostility or relate information they
would never voluntarily divulge to anyone. This is the real danger they
see in hypnosis. To protect themselves from it, they attack it. It is
much like the fanatic vice crusader who militantly attacks sin in order
to alleviate his own feelings of guilt stemming from the fact that vice
actually attracts him.
Fear of hypnosis takes different forms, but basically it is the fear of
revealing one's true feelings. An employee, for instance, at a gathering
which included the employer he dislikes, would never volunteer as a
subject for hypnosis if the occasion arose. He would be afraid he would
do or say something which might endanger his position. Hypnosis for him
would be "dangerous" because he would be afraid to take the chance. The
truth is, however, that this individual would be taking no chance. The
hypnotic state is not a confessional period. The subject is aware at
all times of what he is saying. If the subject does not wish to pursue a
line of questioning, he tells the hypnotist. If the hypnotist persisted
further along this line, the subject would shake off the hypnotic state.
Another misconception about hypnosis is the widely held belief that the
subject is unconscious. This represents a threat to the security of the
individual. Actually, the hypnotic state is a period of extreme
awareness in which the subject is hyperacute. Furthermore, the subject
is not asleep, nor is he in a trance state in the correct meaning of
that term. He is in an altered state of awareness with his faculties and
reasoning ability intact. Inducing hypnosis merely creates a mood or
state in which the powers of suggestibility are heightened.
When the general public and the medical profession become familiar with
the true nature of hypnosis, we shall have a greater acceptance and
utilization of this power. It is a slow process but one which will
finally evolve. In the final analysis, I believe the only danger that
exists is in the mind of the individual who fears hypnosis because of
whatever subjective qualms he has about his own emotional involvement in
the hypnotic process.
Of course, all persons using hypnosis for the alleviation of pain should
consult their family physician. Pain is nature's way of indicating that
something is wrong with the organism. It would be foolish to suggest
that a pain in the stomach will disappear when this may be a sign of a
needed appendix operation. The same may be said of constant migraine
headaches. It must be determined that the headache is not a symptom of a
brain tumor or some other pathological condition. It may be of interest
to know that hypnosis is presently being used to relieve pain in
terminal cancer patients. There is an excellent article on this subject,
and I recommend it to doctors reading this book. It is called "The Use
of Hypnosis in the Case of the Cancer Patient" which appeared in the
January 1954 issue of _Cancer_.[1]
[1] At the same time, I would highly recommend the booklet,
_Helping the Dying Patient and His Family_, published by the
National Association of Social Workers, 2 Park Avenue, New York
16, New York. Price: 75 cents.
There are at present several thousand dentists throughout the country
using hypnosis. They have formed their own society and publish a
quarterly journal, _The Journal of the American Society of Psychosomatic
Dentistry_. One of the best books in this field is called _Dental
Hypnosis Handbook_ by Jacob Stolzenberg, D.D.S.
An excellent article is "Danger! Hypnotherapist at Work" by M.
Abramson.[2] The author reviews briefly the pros and cons regarding the
medical use of hypnosis. He concludes: "It is the author's opinion,
based on an extensive personal experience of over 15 years, that the use
of hypnotherapy by a physician or dentist who has been properly trained
and who uses this technique strictly within his field of competence
carries with it no more (and probably less) 'danger' than the use of
many other techniques of treatment used in medicine today."
[2] Bull. Hennepin Co. Med. Soc., 1960, 31:101-106
Recommended Resources http://astiro.cohypnosis.hop.clickbank.net
What About the Dangers of Hypnosis?
One of the objections that you hear to hypnosis is that it can be
dangerous in the hands of those not trained in the psychodynamics of
human behavior. Inasmuch as psychiatrists and clinical psychologists are
the only ones who are thoroughly trained in the analysis of human
behavior, this objection, if valid, could limit hypnosis to a
comparative handful of therapists. Fortunately, it is not valid. This
was proved several years ago when the "Bridey Murphy" craze gripped the
country. Despite the fact that thousands of amateur hypnotists were
practicing hypnosis, little or no harm resulted. I have personally
instructed several thousand medical and non-medical individuals and have
yet to hear of a single case where a crisis was precipitated or anything
of a dangerous or detrimental nature occurred as a result of hypnosis. I
have also taught several thousand persons self-hypnosis and can report
the same findings.
Many patients who seek treatment from competent psychiatrists,
psychoanalysts and psychologists do not always obtain satisfactory
results. This doesn't mean that everyone should stop seeking help from
these specialists. Even a specialist doesn't have a perfect record of
successful therapy.
What then is the objection to hypnosis? The theory that if you get rid
of one symptom another symptom will take its place really holds no truth
and is usually advanced by those who have had little or no experience in
the hypnosis field. However, a difference of opinion does exist even
with those practicing hypnosis in this area. Some hypnotists "trade
down" symptoms by replacing a serious symptom with a minor one, while
others just remove the symptom. The latter is what a doctor does when he
recommends aspirin for arthritis. He knows the aspirin will not cure the
arthritis, but he wants to alleviate the symptom. To say that another
symptom will replace the pain is unscientific--and untrue. The same is
true of hypnosis.
Lewis R. Wolberg, M.D., clinical professor of psychiatry, New York
Medical College, recently canvassed 30 experts in the field of hypnosis
and found a few who felt symptom removal was "irrational, temporary--or
outright dangerous." The large majority, however, "employed symptom
removal where indicated, and minimized or ridiculed any possible bad
effects."
A further objection to hypnosis is that the results are temporary as
well as symptomatic. It is well to remember that most medical therapy is
specifically directed to symptom removal. How permanent is most medical
treatment? Once you couple hetero-hypnosis with self-hypnosis, you
afford the patient the opportunity of utilizing suggestions for his own
benefit any time they are needed. This, of course, can make symptom
relief permanent. As an example, I would see no harm in teaching a
patient self-hypnosis for symptomatic relief from a problem of insomnia.
It would certainly be better than physically depressing the higher brain
centers with sleeping pills to produce unconsciousness every night. I
needn't tell you that millions of dollars are spent every year on
sleeping pills and patients become dependent upon them, needing more and
more pills in order to produce sleep. Many accidental suicides stem from
an overdose of sleeping pills. Yet, despite the inherent dangers of
sleeping pills which are glaringly apparent, they are prescribed by the
millions, to say nothing of those that reach the market through illegal
channels. Furthermore, how much effort is really made to get the patient
off the sleeping pills? There are also more voluntary suicides by
sleeping pills than by any other method. Perhaps if these drugs weren't
so readily available, many of these unfortunate individuals would be
with us today.
What about the often-quoted statement that "you might do some damage"?
Let's explore this area. I assume that the reader is somewhat familiar
with the work of Emile Coue or at least has heard of his famous
autosuggestion formula of "Day by day, in every way, I'm getting better
and better." During our time, thousands upon thousands of seemingly
helpless and hopeless cases have been cured by repeating this
affirmation over and over again, day after day, as the individual falls
asleep.
I think we should make it clear that whether we call it autosuggestion,
positive thinking, meditation, yoga, affirmations or self-hypnosis, we
are, in reality, talking about the same thing. All require certain basic
prerequisites before they will work effectively for the individual.
We'll discuss these prerequisites in the next chapter.
What should be remembered is that the suggestions are being filtered
into the subconscious mind which does not question, doubt, analyze or
dispute the efficacy of these beneficial thoughts. You can be sure that
the constant repetition will have its effect. Hasn't the mind, in the
past, accepted the individual's diagnosis when he said, "I'm sick," "I
have an inferiority complex," "I can't stop smoking," "I can't lose
weight," "I can't concentrate," "I can remember a person's face, but I
can't remember names," "I have a difficult time falling asleep," "I just
can't seem to relax." Isn't such an individual, in effect, using
self-hypnosis? And hasn't the person convinced himself of the validity
of his present state? This is truly dangerous. It is negative hypnosis.
The question that I raise is: "Why shouldn't the subconscious mind be
even more convinced and respond strongly to suggestions which are in
conformity with the natural desire to be of sound body and mind?" I have
never been able to find a logical answer.
I think this is what happens many times. A person seeks help with a
problem which, in reality, has nothing to do with hypnosis. His cure is
not contingent on being hypnotized or on suggestions he or the hypnotist
feel are indicated. You will read in nearly every book and article
dealing with hypnosis that "hypnotism is not a cure-all." No one has
suggested or implied that it should be used exclusively for all
emotional problems. You may read a newspaper article warning about the
"dangers" of hypnosis. It may tell of a person who rid himself of one
symptom and developed another in its place. You usually get a grossly
distorted picture of what happened, with many aspects of the case not
included. It's a matter of taking what you want to prove out of
context. Propagandists use this technique all the time to get across
their message. It's the old story of telling a half truth.
Honest criticism and a sincere difference of opinion are always welcome.
But criticism must be well-founded from a scientific point of view and
not stem from an emotional reaction. You have probably heard the remark,
"I won't let anyone hypnotize me." What are they really saying, and what
does hypnosis represent to such an individual? To them, hypnosis
represents some sort of "magic spell" which invokes a state of complete
helplessness and dependency upon the hypnotist. We previously discussed
how this erroneous conception can take place because of the manner in
which hypnosis is usually interwoven with bizarre fictional stories.
For many, the hypnotic state represents a period in which the conscious
guard is dropped. They feel they may compulsively reveal the darker side
of their nature, confess their hostility or relate information they
would never voluntarily divulge to anyone. This is the real danger they
see in hypnosis. To protect themselves from it, they attack it. It is
much like the fanatic vice crusader who militantly attacks sin in order
to alleviate his own feelings of guilt stemming from the fact that vice
actually attracts him.
Fear of hypnosis takes different forms, but basically it is the fear of
revealing one's true feelings. An employee, for instance, at a gathering
which included the employer he dislikes, would never volunteer as a
subject for hypnosis if the occasion arose. He would be afraid he would
do or say something which might endanger his position. Hypnosis for him
would be "dangerous" because he would be afraid to take the chance. The
truth is, however, that this individual would be taking no chance. The
hypnotic state is not a confessional period. The subject is aware at
all times of what he is saying. If the subject does not wish to pursue a
line of questioning, he tells the hypnotist. If the hypnotist persisted
further along this line, the subject would shake off the hypnotic state.
Another misconception about hypnosis is the widely held belief that the
subject is unconscious. This represents a threat to the security of the
individual. Actually, the hypnotic state is a period of extreme
awareness in which the subject is hyperacute. Furthermore, the subject
is not asleep, nor is he in a trance state in the correct meaning of
that term. He is in an altered state of awareness with his faculties and
reasoning ability intact. Inducing hypnosis merely creates a mood or
state in which the powers of suggestibility are heightened.
When the general public and the medical profession become familiar with
the true nature of hypnosis, we shall have a greater acceptance and
utilization of this power. It is a slow process but one which will
finally evolve. In the final analysis, I believe the only danger that
exists is in the mind of the individual who fears hypnosis because of
whatever subjective qualms he has about his own emotional involvement in
the hypnotic process.
Of course, all persons using hypnosis for the alleviation of pain should
consult their family physician. Pain is nature's way of indicating that
something is wrong with the organism. It would be foolish to suggest
that a pain in the stomach will disappear when this may be a sign of a
needed appendix operation. The same may be said of constant migraine
headaches. It must be determined that the headache is not a symptom of a
brain tumor or some other pathological condition. It may be of interest
to know that hypnosis is presently being used to relieve pain in
terminal cancer patients. There is an excellent article on this subject,
and I recommend it to doctors reading this book. It is called "The Use
of Hypnosis in the Case of the Cancer Patient" which appeared in the
January 1954 issue of _Cancer_.[1]
[1] At the same time, I would highly recommend the booklet,
_Helping the Dying Patient and His Family_, published by the
National Association of Social Workers, 2 Park Avenue, New York
16, New York. Price: 75 cents.
There are at present several thousand dentists throughout the country
using hypnosis. They have formed their own society and publish a
quarterly journal, _The Journal of the American Society of Psychosomatic
Dentistry_. One of the best books in this field is called _Dental
Hypnosis Handbook_ by Jacob Stolzenberg, D.D.S.
An excellent article is "Danger! Hypnotherapist at Work" by M.
Abramson.[2] The author reviews briefly the pros and cons regarding the
medical use of hypnosis. He concludes: "It is the author's opinion,
based on an extensive personal experience of over 15 years, that the use
of hypnotherapy by a physician or dentist who has been properly trained
and who uses this technique strictly within his field of competence
carries with it no more (and probably less) 'danger' than the use of
many other techniques of treatment used in medicine today."
[2] Bull. Hennepin Co. Med. Soc., 1960, 31:101-106
Recommended Resources http://astiro.cohypnosis.hop.clickbank.net
A PRATICAL GUIDE TO SELF-HYPNOSIS
Chapter 1
What You Should Know About Self-Hypnosis
Hypnosis has been defined as a state of heightened suggestibility in
which the subject is able to uncritically accept ideas for
self-improvement and act on them appropriately. When a hypnotist
hypnotizes his subject, it is known as hetero-hypnosis. When an
individual puts himself into a state of hypnosis, it is known as
self-hypnosis. In both cases, the subject has achieved a heightened
state of suggestibility. Even in hetero-hypnosis, the subject really
controls the response to suggestions. Actually, all hypnosis is really a
matter of self-hypnosis. The subject enters into the hypnotic state when
he is completely ready to do so. This may require from one to many
attempts before it is achieved. Even if the subject insists that he
wants to be hypnotized immediately, he may be resisting hypnosis
unconsciously.
In self-hypnosis the same thing usually takes place. The subject is
anxious to achieve self-hypnosis, but somehow the state eludes him.
What's wrong? It may be that he is unconsciously resisting it, hasn't
conditioned himself sufficiently, or has achieved the hypnotic state and
doesn't know he is in the state. This last statement may be surprising,
but we will examine it in detail a little later on.
Most experts agree that about 90 percent of the population can be
hypnotized. My own feeling is that probably 99 percent can be
hypnotized. Who among us is not influenced by suggestion? Aren't we all,
as we have seen, influenced by the suggestions of advertising? Don't we
all have a tendency to believe what we read in the paper, hear on the
radio or see on television? Aren't we all convinced that a name-brand
article is better than one that is not so well-known?
Suggestion plays a tremendously important role in our daily lives. It
begins from naming the baby with an appropriate name to securing a
suitable place for interment. I would like to call the reader's
attention to a fascinating book dealing with the unconscious reasons why
we do many of the things that we do. You will be intrigued with every
page of the book. It is called _The Hidden Persuaders_ by Vance Packard.
My contention is that we are all suggestible and, therefore, being
hypnotized or hypnotizing ourselves is just a matter of increasing the
suggestibility that we already possess. Doesn't the hypnotist begin by
suggesting relaxation? Doesn't he usually begin by requesting the
subject to fix his attention on a particular object? Next, he suggests
to the subject that his eyes are becoming heavy and tired. As soon as
the subject closes his eyes, he suggests that he will be in a deep
hypnotic state. I am sure that you are familiar with this procedure.
With each step, the hypnotist is guiding the subject along directed
lines to get him to accept further suggestions without question or
doubt. When the subject achieves the ultimate state in this procedure,
he has been hypnotized. He then accepts suggestions without
equivocation.
Let us continue with this same thought. Suppose I say to you, "I'm going
to stick you with this pin. It won't hurt." Would you let me stick you
with the pin? Obviously not. Let us suppose that you have been
hypnotized and I repeat the same suggestion. What happens then? You
readily accept the suggestion as being factual. Should I proceed to
stick you with the pin, you do not even flinch. In fact, you do not even
feel the pain. Does this sound incredible? Isn't this exactly the same
procedure that the dentist uses with his patient when he has hypnotized
him for the purpose of painless dentistry?
Achieving hypnosis, therefore, is a matter of directing this
suggestibility that we all possess into the channels that will finally
produce the hypnotic state. It can be much more complicated than this
explanation in many cases, but let us use this as a working premise.
Everyone can be hypnotized. The time required for achieving hypnosis
will vary from subject to subject. We will discuss some of the reasons
for this in a subsequent chapter, but for our discussion at this time we
need to understand this point. I have encountered numerous individuals
who were extremely disappointed because they did not respond to hypnosis
immediately or after several attempts. They wanted to know "what was
wrong." An explanation that nothing was wrong somehow did not satisfy
these individuals. "After all," they argued, "didn't I go to a hypnotist
especially to be hypnotized?" Some insinuated that perhaps the hypnotist
wasn't too good.
Let me explain that most subjects need to be conditioned for hypnosis,
and this conditioning is helped when the subject practices certain
conditioning exercises that I shall discuss in detail in chapter six,
titled "How To Attain Self-Hypnosis." In my teaching, I have found that
about one out of ten subjects responds to the first attempt at hypnosis.
One cannot make a definite statement as to the length of time necessary
to learn self-hypnosis, but it is my experience that this usually takes
about one month. I have had subjects learn self-hypnosis in about 30
minutes, but I must also relate that I have worked with subjects for one
year before they achieved it.
For the most part, the laws of learning apply to self-hypnosis as with
anything else that one would want to learn. It can be a relatively
simple procedure, or it can be very perplexing. The answer lies not so
much with the hypnotist as with the subject.
One question that arises is: "If I'm under hypnosis, how can I give
myself suggestions?" During the hypnotic state, it must be remembered,
the subject is always aware of what is going on. He hears what is said,
follows directions and terminates the state when told to do so. In the
self-hypnotic state, the subject is in full control. Therefore, he can
think, reason, act, criticize, suggest or do whatever he desires. He can
audibly give himself suggestions, or he can mentally give himself
suggestions. In either case, he does not rouse from the hypnotic state
until he gives himself specific suggestions to do so. Many feel if they
audibly give themselves suggestions, they will "awaken." In
hypno-analysis, the subject answers questions during the hypnotic state.
Having the subject talk does not terminate the state. You can keep the
talkative subject under hypnosis as long as you want. Furthermore, the
subject can be sitting erect with his eyes open and still be under
hypnosis. Carrying this further, the subject may not even be aware that
he is under hypnosis. He can be given a cue not to remember when the
therapist makes a certain motion or says a certain word that he will go
back into the hypnotic state but still keep his eyes open. Only an
experienced hypnotist could detect the change.
Another frequent question is: "How do I arouse myself from the
self-hypnotic state?" You merely say to yourself that upon counting to
five you will open your eyes and wake up feeling fine. Many times the
subject falls asleep while giving himself posthypnotic suggestions. This
is not undesirable since the suggestions will spill over into the
subconscious mind as he goes from consciousness to unconsciousness.
A popular opinion about hypnosis is that the subject surrenders his will
to the hypnotist in the process of being hypnotized. Furthermore, many
believe that once the subject is hypnotized, the hypnotist has complete
control of the subject and the subject is powerless to resist
suggestion. Both beliefs are erroneous. I believe the first
misconception comes from seeing techniques where the hypnotist requests
the subject to look into his eyes. The hypnotist suggests to the subject
that as he continues to look into his eyes he will fall into a deep
hypnotic state. This, then, becomes a matter of who can outstare whom.
The subject usually begins to blink his eyes and the hypnotist follows
this up with rapid suggestions that the subject's eyes are becoming
watery and heavy and that the subject will fall into a deep hypnotic
sleep just as soon as he (the subject) closes his eyes. This procedure
gives the impression to the observer that the subject is "willed" to go
under hypnosis. It appears that once the hypnotist concentrates or wills
sufficiently, the subject succumbs. Actually, the hypnotist in this
technique is not looking into the eyes of the subject. He fixes his
attention on the bridge of the nose of the subject.
The concept that the subject is a helpless automaton stems from the
weird movies where the "mad scientist" has hypnotized subjects into
behaving like zombies. Naturally, there is usually a beautiful girl in
the movie and she, too, has been hypnotized. Even though the audience is
sophisticated enough to realize that this science-fiction drama is
purely entertainment, the theme is repeated sufficiently in novels,
comics, and television to make an indelible impression on the
subconscious mind. It's the technique of telling the "big lie" so many
times that it becomes believable. We are all influenced by this
procedure. There is an excellent book explaining this very premise. It
is called _Battle For The Mind_ by William Sargent. It describes in
detail the technique by which evangelists, psychiatrists, politicians
and advertising men can change your beliefs and behavior.
Following the reasoning that the subconscious mind can be affected, you
can see that a problem could present itself even though the subject
consciously wishes to be hypnotized. Unconsciously, there may be a poor
interrelationship with the hypnotist which can create an unfavorable
climate for hypnosis. When this is the case, the subject doesn't respond
until such time that he relates well to the hypnotist. Even the most
calculated procedures will fail until a positive transference
relationship is established. I am sure that you sometimes have said,
"For some reason I don't like that person." If pressed for an answer,
you'll usually reply, "I can't explain it, but I just have a feeling
about him." Actually, your subconscious reactions are influencing your
thinking and you "feel" a certain way. The same thing takes place in
business transactions. You either like or dislike the proposition
presented to you. You may say, "I have a certain feeling about this
deal." You may not be conscious of the reasons, but your subconscious
has reacted automatically because of previous experience along similar
lines.
In giving you some insight into the hypnotic procedure, I am trying to
point out certain problems in regard to acquiring self-hypnosis. For the
most part, it is not a simple procedure that is accomplished
immediately. You can't just will it. It requires working toward a
specific goal and following definite procedures which eventually lead to
success.
The hypnotist is usually endowed by the subject with an omniscience and
infallibility which logically is unjustified. The subject is naturally
extremely disappointed if he doesn't respond immediately. If he loses
confidence in the hypnotist, he may never achieve hypnosis with this
particular hypnotist. I have hypnotized subjects who have been to
several other hypnotists without success, and I have had some of my
unsuccessful subjects hypnotized by other hypnotists. How and why does
it happen? I believe that some of the reasons are so intangible that it
would be impossible to explain all of them with any degree of
exactitude.
I once saw an individual about 12 times who wanted to learn
self-hypnosis and had been unsuccessful in every approach. I asked him
if he would volunteer as a subject for a class in techniques of hypnosis
that I was teaching for nurses. He readily volunteered and showed up at
the designated time. Much to my amazement as well as his own, he
responded within a relatively short time as one of the nurses hypnotized
him before the group. She had used a standard eye closure technique,
requesting him to look at a spinning hypnodisc that I had previously
used with him every time he was in the office. Her manner was extremely
affable, she had used the identical technique I had used unsuccessfully,
and the subject responded excellently to cap the climax. He was the
first subject the nurse had ever hypnotized, since this was only her
third lesson.
How would you account for it? Here was one of my students with two
weeks' experience hypnotizing a subject where I had failed while using
every procedure that I felt would work. Was it because she was a better
hypnotist? Perhaps! However, I'd like to recall at this time our
discussion about subconscious responses. I'm inclined to feel that being
hypnotized by a middle-aged female nurse created certain favorable
unconscious responses which accounted for his going under hypnosis at
that time. It created the initial break-through which was needed. I was
able to hypnotize him easily at his next appointment, and he acquired
self-hypnosis readily from that time on.
I have tried the same approach with other subjects who did not respond
favorably and have failed to attain the success that I did in the above
case. Why the impasse? It is one of the difficulties that we encounter
in hypnosis, and as yet it has not been resolved.
We know that the easiest way to achieve self-hypnosis is to be
hypnotized and given a posthypnotic suggestion that you will respond to
hypnosis by a key word, phrase or gesture. I have tried to point out
some problems that can arise. Needless to say, these problems do not
always arise, and the attainment of self-hypnosis can be a relatively
simple procedure. There is usually some way of reaching a subject who
does not respond in a reasonable length of time.
Now we come to the point where the subject wishes to hypnotize himself.
What happens in this situation? It would appear that the subject would
go under hypnosis immediately. After all, isn't he controlling the
hypnotic session? Of course, this does happen time and time again, and
the results seem miraculous. I receive mail constantly from readers of
several of my other books on hypnosis telling me how they were able to
achieve certain goals that they never dreamed possible. They write that
they have achieved self-confidence and complete self-mastery and have
been able to overcome problems that have plagued them for many years.
These problems not only include strictly psychological troubles but many
psychosomatic symptoms as well. Many have remarked at the ease in which
they were able to achieve self-hypnosis and the results they wanted. For
them it was as simple as following a do-it-yourself book.
Others write about the difficulty they encounter and ask what to do
about it. It is my hope that this book will shed some light for those
who have experienced difficulty in learning self-hypnosis. We shall
discuss many phases of hypnosis with the emphasis on self-hypnosis.
We'll discuss its many ramifications and try not to leave out anything
helpful in our discussion.
If you follow the instructions and exercises that I give you
assiduously, you should be able to achieve a depth of self-hypnosis
suitable for solving many of your personal problems.
What You Should Know About Self-Hypnosis
Hypnosis has been defined as a state of heightened suggestibility in
which the subject is able to uncritically accept ideas for
self-improvement and act on them appropriately. When a hypnotist
hypnotizes his subject, it is known as hetero-hypnosis. When an
individual puts himself into a state of hypnosis, it is known as
self-hypnosis. In both cases, the subject has achieved a heightened
state of suggestibility. Even in hetero-hypnosis, the subject really
controls the response to suggestions. Actually, all hypnosis is really a
matter of self-hypnosis. The subject enters into the hypnotic state when
he is completely ready to do so. This may require from one to many
attempts before it is achieved. Even if the subject insists that he
wants to be hypnotized immediately, he may be resisting hypnosis
unconsciously.
In self-hypnosis the same thing usually takes place. The subject is
anxious to achieve self-hypnosis, but somehow the state eludes him.
What's wrong? It may be that he is unconsciously resisting it, hasn't
conditioned himself sufficiently, or has achieved the hypnotic state and
doesn't know he is in the state. This last statement may be surprising,
but we will examine it in detail a little later on.
Most experts agree that about 90 percent of the population can be
hypnotized. My own feeling is that probably 99 percent can be
hypnotized. Who among us is not influenced by suggestion? Aren't we all,
as we have seen, influenced by the suggestions of advertising? Don't we
all have a tendency to believe what we read in the paper, hear on the
radio or see on television? Aren't we all convinced that a name-brand
article is better than one that is not so well-known?
Suggestion plays a tremendously important role in our daily lives. It
begins from naming the baby with an appropriate name to securing a
suitable place for interment. I would like to call the reader's
attention to a fascinating book dealing with the unconscious reasons why
we do many of the things that we do. You will be intrigued with every
page of the book. It is called _The Hidden Persuaders_ by Vance Packard.
My contention is that we are all suggestible and, therefore, being
hypnotized or hypnotizing ourselves is just a matter of increasing the
suggestibility that we already possess. Doesn't the hypnotist begin by
suggesting relaxation? Doesn't he usually begin by requesting the
subject to fix his attention on a particular object? Next, he suggests
to the subject that his eyes are becoming heavy and tired. As soon as
the subject closes his eyes, he suggests that he will be in a deep
hypnotic state. I am sure that you are familiar with this procedure.
With each step, the hypnotist is guiding the subject along directed
lines to get him to accept further suggestions without question or
doubt. When the subject achieves the ultimate state in this procedure,
he has been hypnotized. He then accepts suggestions without
equivocation.
Let us continue with this same thought. Suppose I say to you, "I'm going
to stick you with this pin. It won't hurt." Would you let me stick you
with the pin? Obviously not. Let us suppose that you have been
hypnotized and I repeat the same suggestion. What happens then? You
readily accept the suggestion as being factual. Should I proceed to
stick you with the pin, you do not even flinch. In fact, you do not even
feel the pain. Does this sound incredible? Isn't this exactly the same
procedure that the dentist uses with his patient when he has hypnotized
him for the purpose of painless dentistry?
Achieving hypnosis, therefore, is a matter of directing this
suggestibility that we all possess into the channels that will finally
produce the hypnotic state. It can be much more complicated than this
explanation in many cases, but let us use this as a working premise.
Everyone can be hypnotized. The time required for achieving hypnosis
will vary from subject to subject. We will discuss some of the reasons
for this in a subsequent chapter, but for our discussion at this time we
need to understand this point. I have encountered numerous individuals
who were extremely disappointed because they did not respond to hypnosis
immediately or after several attempts. They wanted to know "what was
wrong." An explanation that nothing was wrong somehow did not satisfy
these individuals. "After all," they argued, "didn't I go to a hypnotist
especially to be hypnotized?" Some insinuated that perhaps the hypnotist
wasn't too good.
Let me explain that most subjects need to be conditioned for hypnosis,
and this conditioning is helped when the subject practices certain
conditioning exercises that I shall discuss in detail in chapter six,
titled "How To Attain Self-Hypnosis." In my teaching, I have found that
about one out of ten subjects responds to the first attempt at hypnosis.
One cannot make a definite statement as to the length of time necessary
to learn self-hypnosis, but it is my experience that this usually takes
about one month. I have had subjects learn self-hypnosis in about 30
minutes, but I must also relate that I have worked with subjects for one
year before they achieved it.
For the most part, the laws of learning apply to self-hypnosis as with
anything else that one would want to learn. It can be a relatively
simple procedure, or it can be very perplexing. The answer lies not so
much with the hypnotist as with the subject.
One question that arises is: "If I'm under hypnosis, how can I give
myself suggestions?" During the hypnotic state, it must be remembered,
the subject is always aware of what is going on. He hears what is said,
follows directions and terminates the state when told to do so. In the
self-hypnotic state, the subject is in full control. Therefore, he can
think, reason, act, criticize, suggest or do whatever he desires. He can
audibly give himself suggestions, or he can mentally give himself
suggestions. In either case, he does not rouse from the hypnotic state
until he gives himself specific suggestions to do so. Many feel if they
audibly give themselves suggestions, they will "awaken." In
hypno-analysis, the subject answers questions during the hypnotic state.
Having the subject talk does not terminate the state. You can keep the
talkative subject under hypnosis as long as you want. Furthermore, the
subject can be sitting erect with his eyes open and still be under
hypnosis. Carrying this further, the subject may not even be aware that
he is under hypnosis. He can be given a cue not to remember when the
therapist makes a certain motion or says a certain word that he will go
back into the hypnotic state but still keep his eyes open. Only an
experienced hypnotist could detect the change.
Another frequent question is: "How do I arouse myself from the
self-hypnotic state?" You merely say to yourself that upon counting to
five you will open your eyes and wake up feeling fine. Many times the
subject falls asleep while giving himself posthypnotic suggestions. This
is not undesirable since the suggestions will spill over into the
subconscious mind as he goes from consciousness to unconsciousness.
A popular opinion about hypnosis is that the subject surrenders his will
to the hypnotist in the process of being hypnotized. Furthermore, many
believe that once the subject is hypnotized, the hypnotist has complete
control of the subject and the subject is powerless to resist
suggestion. Both beliefs are erroneous. I believe the first
misconception comes from seeing techniques where the hypnotist requests
the subject to look into his eyes. The hypnotist suggests to the subject
that as he continues to look into his eyes he will fall into a deep
hypnotic state. This, then, becomes a matter of who can outstare whom.
The subject usually begins to blink his eyes and the hypnotist follows
this up with rapid suggestions that the subject's eyes are becoming
watery and heavy and that the subject will fall into a deep hypnotic
sleep just as soon as he (the subject) closes his eyes. This procedure
gives the impression to the observer that the subject is "willed" to go
under hypnosis. It appears that once the hypnotist concentrates or wills
sufficiently, the subject succumbs. Actually, the hypnotist in this
technique is not looking into the eyes of the subject. He fixes his
attention on the bridge of the nose of the subject.
The concept that the subject is a helpless automaton stems from the
weird movies where the "mad scientist" has hypnotized subjects into
behaving like zombies. Naturally, there is usually a beautiful girl in
the movie and she, too, has been hypnotized. Even though the audience is
sophisticated enough to realize that this science-fiction drama is
purely entertainment, the theme is repeated sufficiently in novels,
comics, and television to make an indelible impression on the
subconscious mind. It's the technique of telling the "big lie" so many
times that it becomes believable. We are all influenced by this
procedure. There is an excellent book explaining this very premise. It
is called _Battle For The Mind_ by William Sargent. It describes in
detail the technique by which evangelists, psychiatrists, politicians
and advertising men can change your beliefs and behavior.
Following the reasoning that the subconscious mind can be affected, you
can see that a problem could present itself even though the subject
consciously wishes to be hypnotized. Unconsciously, there may be a poor
interrelationship with the hypnotist which can create an unfavorable
climate for hypnosis. When this is the case, the subject doesn't respond
until such time that he relates well to the hypnotist. Even the most
calculated procedures will fail until a positive transference
relationship is established. I am sure that you sometimes have said,
"For some reason I don't like that person." If pressed for an answer,
you'll usually reply, "I can't explain it, but I just have a feeling
about him." Actually, your subconscious reactions are influencing your
thinking and you "feel" a certain way. The same thing takes place in
business transactions. You either like or dislike the proposition
presented to you. You may say, "I have a certain feeling about this
deal." You may not be conscious of the reasons, but your subconscious
has reacted automatically because of previous experience along similar
lines.
In giving you some insight into the hypnotic procedure, I am trying to
point out certain problems in regard to acquiring self-hypnosis. For the
most part, it is not a simple procedure that is accomplished
immediately. You can't just will it. It requires working toward a
specific goal and following definite procedures which eventually lead to
success.
The hypnotist is usually endowed by the subject with an omniscience and
infallibility which logically is unjustified. The subject is naturally
extremely disappointed if he doesn't respond immediately. If he loses
confidence in the hypnotist, he may never achieve hypnosis with this
particular hypnotist. I have hypnotized subjects who have been to
several other hypnotists without success, and I have had some of my
unsuccessful subjects hypnotized by other hypnotists. How and why does
it happen? I believe that some of the reasons are so intangible that it
would be impossible to explain all of them with any degree of
exactitude.
I once saw an individual about 12 times who wanted to learn
self-hypnosis and had been unsuccessful in every approach. I asked him
if he would volunteer as a subject for a class in techniques of hypnosis
that I was teaching for nurses. He readily volunteered and showed up at
the designated time. Much to my amazement as well as his own, he
responded within a relatively short time as one of the nurses hypnotized
him before the group. She had used a standard eye closure technique,
requesting him to look at a spinning hypnodisc that I had previously
used with him every time he was in the office. Her manner was extremely
affable, she had used the identical technique I had used unsuccessfully,
and the subject responded excellently to cap the climax. He was the
first subject the nurse had ever hypnotized, since this was only her
third lesson.
How would you account for it? Here was one of my students with two
weeks' experience hypnotizing a subject where I had failed while using
every procedure that I felt would work. Was it because she was a better
hypnotist? Perhaps! However, I'd like to recall at this time our
discussion about subconscious responses. I'm inclined to feel that being
hypnotized by a middle-aged female nurse created certain favorable
unconscious responses which accounted for his going under hypnosis at
that time. It created the initial break-through which was needed. I was
able to hypnotize him easily at his next appointment, and he acquired
self-hypnosis readily from that time on.
I have tried the same approach with other subjects who did not respond
favorably and have failed to attain the success that I did in the above
case. Why the impasse? It is one of the difficulties that we encounter
in hypnosis, and as yet it has not been resolved.
We know that the easiest way to achieve self-hypnosis is to be
hypnotized and given a posthypnotic suggestion that you will respond to
hypnosis by a key word, phrase or gesture. I have tried to point out
some problems that can arise. Needless to say, these problems do not
always arise, and the attainment of self-hypnosis can be a relatively
simple procedure. There is usually some way of reaching a subject who
does not respond in a reasonable length of time.
Now we come to the point where the subject wishes to hypnotize himself.
What happens in this situation? It would appear that the subject would
go under hypnosis immediately. After all, isn't he controlling the
hypnotic session? Of course, this does happen time and time again, and
the results seem miraculous. I receive mail constantly from readers of
several of my other books on hypnosis telling me how they were able to
achieve certain goals that they never dreamed possible. They write that
they have achieved self-confidence and complete self-mastery and have
been able to overcome problems that have plagued them for many years.
These problems not only include strictly psychological troubles but many
psychosomatic symptoms as well. Many have remarked at the ease in which
they were able to achieve self-hypnosis and the results they wanted. For
them it was as simple as following a do-it-yourself book.
Others write about the difficulty they encounter and ask what to do
about it. It is my hope that this book will shed some light for those
who have experienced difficulty in learning self-hypnosis. We shall
discuss many phases of hypnosis with the emphasis on self-hypnosis.
We'll discuss its many ramifications and try not to leave out anything
helpful in our discussion.
If you follow the instructions and exercises that I give you
assiduously, you should be able to achieve a depth of self-hypnosis
suitable for solving many of your personal problems.
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SELF-HYPNOSIS
FOREWORD
All of us like to think that our actions and reactions are a result of
logical thought processes, but the fact is that suggestion influences
our thinking a great deal more than logic. Consciously or unconsciously,
our feelings about almost everything are largely molded by ready-made
opinions and attitudes fostered by our mass methods of communication. We cannot buy a bar of soap or a filtered cigarette without paying tribute
to the impact of suggestion. Right or wrong, most of us place more
confidence in what "they" say than we do in our own powers of reason.
This is the basic reason why psychiatrists are in short supply. We
distrust our own mental processes and want an expert to tell us what to
think and feel.
Despite this tendency to adopt our attitudes from others, man has always
been dimly aware that he can influence his own destiny by directing his
thoughts and actions into constructive channels. He has always, to some
extent, known that his mind exerts a powerful influence on his body, and
that thoughts can have harmful or helpful effects on his emotional and
physical health. The ancient Egyptian sleep temples and the attempts by
early physicians to drive evil spirits out of the body were both
attempts to influence the body through the mind.
The unprecedented sale of _The Power of Positive Thinking_ by Norman
Vincent Peale and other inspirational literature proves that millions of
modern people recognize the efficacy of constructive thoughts. What most of them do not recognize is that they are capable of implanting these beneficial thoughts in their own minds without reference to any outside
agencies. This can be done through self-hypnosis.
In modern society we have many cults, religions and methodologies which have mental discipline as their goal. The best example of a methodology is psychosomatic medicine which deals with the interrelationship of the mind and body in the production of mental or physical illness. The rapid growth of hypnosis in the last few years is another example, and it is gratifying to see that the emphasis in this field is now shifting from hetero-hypnosis to self-hypnosis.
Self-hypnosis is a highly suggestible state wherein the individual can
direct suggestions to himself. It is a powerful tool in any therapeutic
process, and highly motivated subjects can parallel the success of
hetero-hypnosis through their own efforts. Self-hypnosis can be used as
a palliative agent and can even afford lasting results in many areas of
the organism. Self-hypnosis can alleviate distressing symptoms,
substitute strong responses for weak responses, help overcome bad
habits, create good habits and help one's power of concentration. The
total personality is eventually changed to the point where it can
function adequately in an increasingly difficult environment.
In learning self-hypnosis, the subject does not relinquish control of
himself as is commonly believed. Actually, more control is gained.
Self-sufficiency and self-confidence are inevitable results. It is well
to remember, however, that even good things may be overdone, and good
judgment is necessary for favorable results. Neither hypnosis nor
self-hypnosis should ever be used indiscriminately. The effectiveness of
self-hypnosis depends upon many factors. Strong motivation, intelligent
application of suggestions and diligence are prerequisites.
We are not suggesting that self-hypnosis can take the place of all forms
of psychotherapy. We do recommend it as an adjunct to therapy when
indicated. Used judiciously, it can contribute a great deal to the
individual's physical and emotional well-being and happiness.
As a professional hypnotist for many years, I have seen astounding and
apparently miraculous results by individuals using self-hypnosis. Many
of these cases seem unbelievable to those not familiar with hypnotic
phenomena. It should be remembered, though, that many individuals seek hypnosis only when all other forms of therapy have failed. This is so
common that hypnosis has come to be known as a port of last call. Yet,
despite the seeming hopelessness of such cases, medical literature lists
thousands of remarkable recoveries.
There is nothing hit or miss about hypnosis. Used intelligently, the
results are the same for all those who are properly motivated. Nor are
the results singular to modern hypnotists alone. In reviewing the
literature going back more than 100 years, the same gratifying results
were obtained. The reader would do well to scan some out-of-print books
on hypnosis at the library to understand the point further.
This book is written in terms that are comprehensible to the layman. The
step-by-step instructions should afford the reader a means of acquiring
self-hypnosis. The necessary material is here. The reader need only
follow the instructions as they are given.
The author wishes to thank Robert S. Starrett, member of the American
Medical Writers' Association, for his valuable help in the editorial
preparation of this book.
It is the author's hope that you will, through the selective use of
self-hypnosis, arrive at a more rewarding, well-adjusted and fuller
life.
MELVIN POWERS
12015 Sherman Road
No. Hollywood, California 91605
All of us like to think that our actions and reactions are a result of
logical thought processes, but the fact is that suggestion influences
our thinking a great deal more than logic. Consciously or unconsciously,
our feelings about almost everything are largely molded by ready-made
opinions and attitudes fostered by our mass methods of communication. We cannot buy a bar of soap or a filtered cigarette without paying tribute
to the impact of suggestion. Right or wrong, most of us place more
confidence in what "they" say than we do in our own powers of reason.
This is the basic reason why psychiatrists are in short supply. We
distrust our own mental processes and want an expert to tell us what to
think and feel.
Despite this tendency to adopt our attitudes from others, man has always
been dimly aware that he can influence his own destiny by directing his
thoughts and actions into constructive channels. He has always, to some
extent, known that his mind exerts a powerful influence on his body, and
that thoughts can have harmful or helpful effects on his emotional and
physical health. The ancient Egyptian sleep temples and the attempts by
early physicians to drive evil spirits out of the body were both
attempts to influence the body through the mind.
The unprecedented sale of _The Power of Positive Thinking_ by Norman
Vincent Peale and other inspirational literature proves that millions of
modern people recognize the efficacy of constructive thoughts. What most of them do not recognize is that they are capable of implanting these beneficial thoughts in their own minds without reference to any outside
agencies. This can be done through self-hypnosis.
In modern society we have many cults, religions and methodologies which have mental discipline as their goal. The best example of a methodology is psychosomatic medicine which deals with the interrelationship of the mind and body in the production of mental or physical illness. The rapid growth of hypnosis in the last few years is another example, and it is gratifying to see that the emphasis in this field is now shifting from hetero-hypnosis to self-hypnosis.
Self-hypnosis is a highly suggestible state wherein the individual can
direct suggestions to himself. It is a powerful tool in any therapeutic
process, and highly motivated subjects can parallel the success of
hetero-hypnosis through their own efforts. Self-hypnosis can be used as
a palliative agent and can even afford lasting results in many areas of
the organism. Self-hypnosis can alleviate distressing symptoms,
substitute strong responses for weak responses, help overcome bad
habits, create good habits and help one's power of concentration. The
total personality is eventually changed to the point where it can
function adequately in an increasingly difficult environment.
In learning self-hypnosis, the subject does not relinquish control of
himself as is commonly believed. Actually, more control is gained.
Self-sufficiency and self-confidence are inevitable results. It is well
to remember, however, that even good things may be overdone, and good
judgment is necessary for favorable results. Neither hypnosis nor
self-hypnosis should ever be used indiscriminately. The effectiveness of
self-hypnosis depends upon many factors. Strong motivation, intelligent
application of suggestions and diligence are prerequisites.
We are not suggesting that self-hypnosis can take the place of all forms
of psychotherapy. We do recommend it as an adjunct to therapy when
indicated. Used judiciously, it can contribute a great deal to the
individual's physical and emotional well-being and happiness.
As a professional hypnotist for many years, I have seen astounding and
apparently miraculous results by individuals using self-hypnosis. Many
of these cases seem unbelievable to those not familiar with hypnotic
phenomena. It should be remembered, though, that many individuals seek hypnosis only when all other forms of therapy have failed. This is so
common that hypnosis has come to be known as a port of last call. Yet,
despite the seeming hopelessness of such cases, medical literature lists
thousands of remarkable recoveries.
There is nothing hit or miss about hypnosis. Used intelligently, the
results are the same for all those who are properly motivated. Nor are
the results singular to modern hypnotists alone. In reviewing the
literature going back more than 100 years, the same gratifying results
were obtained. The reader would do well to scan some out-of-print books
on hypnosis at the library to understand the point further.
This book is written in terms that are comprehensible to the layman. The
step-by-step instructions should afford the reader a means of acquiring
self-hypnosis. The necessary material is here. The reader need only
follow the instructions as they are given.
The author wishes to thank Robert S. Starrett, member of the American
Medical Writers' Association, for his valuable help in the editorial
preparation of this book.
It is the author's hope that you will, through the selective use of
self-hypnosis, arrive at a more rewarding, well-adjusted and fuller
life.
MELVIN POWERS
12015 Sherman Road
No. Hollywood, California 91605
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SELF-HYPNOSIS
A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO SELF-HYPNOSIS
by Melvin Powers
You may pass this book onto anyone interested in this subject.
Please distribute it to friends and family and anyone else you may wish.
Recommended Resources http://astiro.cohypnosis.hop.clickbank.net/
CONTENT
CHAPTER
1. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SELF-HYPNOSIS
2. WHAT ABOUT THE DANGERS OF HYPNOSIS?
3. IS HYPNOSIS THE ANSWER?
4. HOW DOES SELF-HYPNOSIS WORK?
5. HOW TO AROUSE YOURSELF FROM THE SELF-HYPNOTIC STATE
6. HOW TO ATTAIN SELF-HYPNOSIS
7. DEEPENING THE SELF-HYPNOTIC STATE
8. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT BECOMING AN EXCELLENT SUBJECT
9. TECHNIQUES FOR REACHING THE SOMNAMBULISTIC STATE
10. A NEW APPROACH TO SELF-HYPNOSIS WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS
11. PSYCHOLOGICAL AIDS AND THEIR FUNCTION
12. THE NATURE OF HYPNOSIS
13. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF SELF-HYPNOSIS
by Melvin Powers
You may pass this book onto anyone interested in this subject.
Please distribute it to friends and family and anyone else you may wish.
Recommended Resources http://astiro.cohypnosis.hop.clickbank.net/
CONTENT
CHAPTER
1. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SELF-HYPNOSIS
2. WHAT ABOUT THE DANGERS OF HYPNOSIS?
3. IS HYPNOSIS THE ANSWER?
4. HOW DOES SELF-HYPNOSIS WORK?
5. HOW TO AROUSE YOURSELF FROM THE SELF-HYPNOTIC STATE
6. HOW TO ATTAIN SELF-HYPNOSIS
7. DEEPENING THE SELF-HYPNOTIC STATE
8. WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT BECOMING AN EXCELLENT SUBJECT
9. TECHNIQUES FOR REACHING THE SOMNAMBULISTIC STATE
10. A NEW APPROACH TO SELF-HYPNOSIS WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS
11. PSYCHOLOGICAL AIDS AND THEIR FUNCTION
12. THE NATURE OF HYPNOSIS
13. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF SELF-HYPNOSIS
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)