# Hypnosis **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 10, 2000, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250 "2000-04-10T08:09:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![G.Nome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@G.Nome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Nome)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 8:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/1 "2000-04-10T08:09:00Z")
How do so many people maintain their beliefs in the paranormal(UFOs for example)in defiance of establishment views(and with so little evidence)and yet readily accept establishment opinion that hypnosis is harmless? Why do stage hypnotist’s acts not provide evidence to the contrary? In evolutionary terms(and whether hypnosis creates an “altered state” or not) what genetic advantage would a hypnotised person have? Is hypnosis a function of the mother/baby relationship? A means of child/noise control necessary to ancient tribes in danger of attack? ---
**Author:** ![WallyM7](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5e925/32.png) [@WallyM7](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WallyM7)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 9:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/2 "2000-04-10T09:11:00Z")
Cecil took this one on a while back. Here’s the link: [http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2\_287.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_287.html) ---
**Author:** ![G.Nome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@G.Nome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Nome)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 9:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/3 "2000-04-10T09:41:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by WallyM7: > \*\*Cecil took this one on a while back. Here’s the link: > [http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2\_287.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_287.html) > > \*\* These questions have nothing to do with “Bridey Murphey” ---
**Author:** ![WallyM7](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5e925/32.png) [@WallyM7](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WallyM7)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/4 "2000-04-10T10:19:00Z")
Oops. wrong link. Well, it won’t kill you to use the search engine. Find it yourself. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/5 "2000-04-10T15:31:00Z")
Hey, **G.Nome,** welcome to the SDMB. Say, you probably didn’t realize it, but there’s already a discussion of hypnotism going on, over in Great Debates. [http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001605.html](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001605.html) (Yes, Wally, I know it’s one of Bjorn’s threads, but I remain optimistic. Besides, if we manage to get one or two people who actually want to talk about hypnotism, we might have a quorum. And if nothing else, we could play pinochle.) :rolleyes: * * * “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen ---
**Author:** ![WallyM7](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b5e925/32.png) [@WallyM7](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WallyM7)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/6 "2000-04-10T15:43:00Z")
ROFLMAO! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![G.Nome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@G.Nome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Nome)\ **Post date:** [April 10, 2000, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/7 "2000-04-10T23:45:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Notthemama: > \*\*Hey, **G.Nome,** welcome to the SDMB. Say, you probably didn’t realize it, but there’s already a discussion of hypnotism going on, over in Great Debates. > [http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001605.html](http://boards.straightdope.com/ubb/Forum7/HTML/001605.html) > > (Yes, Wally, I know it’s one of Bjorn’s threads, but I remain optimistic. Besides, if we manage to get one or two people who actually want to talk about hypnotism, we might have a quorum. And if nothing else, we could play pinochle.) > > :rolleyes: > > \*\* Debates like that are the reason I asked my questions in the first place ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2000, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/8 "2000-04-11T15:50:00Z")
Oh, so you went over there and looked at it? Great! Then you know that we need all the help we can get! Come on down! * * * “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen ---
**Author:** ![David\_B](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/51bf81/32.png) [@David\_B](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_B)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2000, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/9 "2000-04-11T16:35:00Z")
> [@](#): > > … yet readily accept establishment opinion that hypnosis is harmless? Um, who is this “establishment” that has this opinion? Most people in psychology have come to realize that people can be influenced under hypnosis, that false memories can be accidentally implanted under hypnosis, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Jinx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Jinx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jinx)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2000, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/10 "2000-04-11T16:40:00Z")
Excuse me, but can someone please translate the original posted question in plain English? Did I have to see “The Sixth Sense” or something to get it? * * * “They’re coming to take me away ha-ha, ho-ho, hee-hee, to the funny farm where life is beautiful all the time… :)” - Napoleon IV ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2000, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/11 "2000-04-11T18:22:00Z")
## It’s because there are actually five questions in the OP. Removing the subordinate clauses gets you this: [list=1][li]How do so many people maintain their beliefs in the paranormal in defiance of establishment views, and yet readily accept establishment opinion that hypnosis is harmless?[/li][li]Why do stage hypnotist’s acts not provide evidence to the contrary?[/li][li]In evolutionary terms, what genetic advantage would a hypnotised person have?[/li][li]Is hypnosis a function of the mother/baby relationship?[/li][li]Is hypnosis a means of child/noise control necessary to ancient tribes in danger of attack?[/list=1][/li] “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen ---
**Author:** ![G.Nome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@G.Nome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Nome)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2000, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/12 "2000-04-12T01:22:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by David B: > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > … yet readily accept establishment opinion that hypnosis is harmless? > > Um, who is this “establishment” that has this opinion? Most people in psychology have come to realize that people can be influenced under hypnosis, that false memories can be accidentally implanted under hypnosis, etc.\*\* The question for me is whether someone can be hypnotised against their will which is something that is usually adamantly denied. Does agreeing once to hypnosis mean you will be “primed” for hypnosis at another time when you may not be willing? The word “harmful” would then become a euphemism. I think the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests this but in a confused way as far as I’m concerned. ---
**Author:** ![douglips](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@douglips](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/douglips)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2000, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/13 "2000-04-12T01:58:00Z")
Afghanistan banana stand. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [April 12, 2000, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/14 "2000-04-12T15:17:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\*originally posted by G.Nome: > The question for me is whether someone can be hypnotised against their will which is something that is usually adamantly denied. Does agreeing once to hypnosis mean you will be “primed” for hypnosis at another time when you may not be willing? The word “harmful” would then become a euphemism. > I think the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests this but in a confused way as far as I’m concerned. \*\* Well, I guess if G.Nome won’t come to the discussion, the discussion will come to G.Nome. I am not familiar with the Catholic Encyclopedia. I would have to guess, by its name, that it might perhaps be just a tiny bit biased, overall. (Unless its authors are using the word “catholic” in its lower-case original sense, that of “all-encompassing”.) Here is what Compton’s Encyclopedia, 1997, has to say. (Yes, I realize that it would probably count as an “establishment” authority, but here at the SDMB, “establishment authorities” are what we customarily use as references, books such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, the Merriam-Webster dictionary, etc.) > [@](#): > > (italics mine)\*\* > The state of hypnosis is produced essentially by inducing deep relaxation and focused concentration. Subjects become quite unresponsive to ordinary forms of stimulation, and though they are told to sleep, they are also told to listen and be ready to respond to commands or suggestions made by the hypnotist. > The suggestion that they are asleep and _the fact that they have previously agreed to cooperate with the hypnotist_ make the subjects less critical than they would be if normally awake. > > The classical methods used to produce hypnosis are usually simple and frequently employ direct commands or monotonous suggestions repeated continuously. Subjects are requested to concentrate on the hypnotist’s voice, or they may be asked to fix their eyes on some object or to concentrate on some repetitive sound. The hypnotist tells the subject over and over again to feel drowsy or relaxed, to let his or her eyelids grow heavy and close, to breathe deeply and comfortably, and to go into a deep sleep. The degree of hypnosis is tested by challenging subjects to perform some simple task while suggesting that they will find it impossible. For instance, the hypnotist may say, “You will be unable to open your eyes no matter how hard you try, and the more you try, the more tightly they will close.” The entire process of induction may take a few minutes or a few seconds, depending on the subject. \*\* You can see that, according to Compton’s Encyclopedia at least, you cannot be hypnotized against your will. You must agree to cooperate with the hypnotist in order to be hypnotized. All those movies like _Svengali_ where you see the hypnotist snap his fingers once and people fall into a trance, are fiction. It’s true that a hypnotist can implant a post-hypnotic suggestion to the effect that “every time I snap my fingers and say the words ‘afghanistan banana stand’, you will fall into a deep sleep,” but in that case, the subject has already agreed to be hypnotized the first time. So, yes, here is an “adamant denial” that you can be hypnotized against your will. ## As for agreeing once to hypnosis meaning that you will be “primed” for hypnosis at a later date, I would say “yes”, for two reasons. One is as I jsut said, that a hypnotist can implant a post-hypnotic suggestion, to the effect that “every time we do this, it will get easier for you to fall into a trance.” The second is just the simple reason that every time you do something, you tend to get better at it. The first time you agree to allow the golf pro to stand behind you and hold your arms in the correct position will “prime” you for the next time you have the golf pro stand behind you and hold your arms in the correct position. “Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast!” - the White Queen ---
**Author:** ![G.Nome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@G.Nome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Nome)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2000, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/15 "2000-04-13T06:29:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Notthemama: > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*\*originally posted by G.Nome: > > The question for me is whether someone can be hypnotised against their will which is something that is usually adamantly denied. Does agreeing once to hypnosis mean you will be “primed” for hypnosis at another time when you may not be willing? The word “harmful” would then become a euphemism. > > I think the Catholic Encyclopedia suggests this but in a confused way as far as I’m concerned. > > \*\* > > Well, I guess if G.Nome won’t come to the discussion, the discussion will come to G.Nome. > > I am not familiar with the Catholic Encyclopedia. I would have to guess, by its name, that it might perhaps be just a tiny bit biased, overall. (Unless its authors are using the word “catholic” in its lower-case original sense, that of “all-encompassing”.) > > Here is what Compton’s Encyclopedia, 1997, has to say. (Yes, I realize that it would probably count as an “establishment” authority, but here at the SDMB, “establishment authorities” are what we customarily use as references, books such as the Encyclopedia Britannica, the Merriam-Webster dictionary, etc.) > > > [@](#): > > > > (italics mine)\*\* > > The state of hypnosis is produced essentially by inducing deep relaxation and focused concentration. Subjects become quite unresponsive to ordinary forms of stimulation, and though they are told to sleep, they are also told to listen and be ready to respond to commands or suggestions made by the hypnotist. > > The suggestion that they are asleep and _the fact that they have previously agreed to cooperate with the hypnotist_ make the subjects less critical than they would be if normally awake. > > > > The classical methods used to produce hypnosis are usually simple and frequently employ direct commands or monotonous suggestions repeated continuously. Subjects are requested to concentrate on the hypnotist’s voice, or they may be asked to fix their eyes on some object or to concentrate on some repetitive sound. The hypnotist tells the subject over and over again to feel drowsy or relaxed, to let his or her eyelids grow heavy and close, to breathe deeply and comfortably, and to go into a deep sleep. The degree of hypnosis is tested by challenging subjects to perform some simple task while suggesting that they will find it impossible. For instance, the hypnotist may say, “You will be unable to open your eyes no matter how hard you try, and the more you try, the more tightly they will close.” The entire process of induction may take a few minutes or a few seconds, depending on the subject. > > \*\* > > You can see that, according to Compton’s Encyclopedia at least, you cannot be hypnotized against your will. You must agree to cooperate with the hypnotist in order to be hypnotized. All those movies like _Svengali_ where you see the hypnotist snap his fingers once and people fall into a trance, are fiction. It’s true that a hypnotist can implant a post-hypnotic suggestion to the effect that “every time I snap my fingers and say the words ‘afghanistan banana stand’, you will fall into a deep sleep,” but in that case, the subject has already agreed to be hypnotized the first time. > > So, yes, here is an “adamant denial” that you can be hypnotized against your will. > > As for agreeing once to hypnosis meaning that you will be “primed” for hypnosis at a later date, I would say “yes”, for two reasons. One is as I jsut said, that a hypnotist can implant a post-hypnotic suggestion, to the effect that “every time we do this, it will get easier for you to fall into a trance.” The second is just the simple reason that every time you do something, you tend to get better at it. The first time you agree to allow the golf pro to stand behind you and hold your arms in the correct position will “prime” you for the next time you have the golf pro stand behind you and hold your arms in the correct position. > \*\* What you do on your “later dates” is your business I suppose ---
**Author:** ![G.Nome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c89c15/32.png) [@G.Nome](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Nome)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2000, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/hypnosis/10250/16 "2000-04-13T06:33:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Notthemama: > \*\*It’s because there are actually five questions in the OP. Removing the subordinate clauses gets you this: > [list=1][li]How do so many people maintain their beliefs in the paranormal in defiance of establishment views, and yet readily accept establishment opinion that hypnosis is harmless?[/li][li]Why do stage hypnotist’s acts not provide evidence to the contrary?[/li][li]In evolutionary terms, what genetic advantage would a hypnotised person have?[/li][li]Is hypnosis a function of the mother/baby relationship?[/li][li]Is hypnosis a means of child/noise control necessary to ancient tribes in danger of attack?[/list=1][/li] > \*\* Sociobiology - fun for all the family. Better than Trivial Pursuit