|
I saw my friend's twin brother get hypnotized at a show once. It was one of those deals where the hypnotist tries to do the whole audience and only some people actually become hypnotized. The guy who I saw get hypnotized I know well and I really don't think hes the kind of guy who would fake it and he did some pretty embarrassing poo poo so there's my 2 cents. Also if hypnotism isn't real at all, it seems weird to me that you can actually make a profession out of getting on a stage and telling people to do stuff and hoping really hard that they actually do it for you. Are there unsuccessful hypnotists? Like if there's nothing to it can't I, having no knowledge of how it works, just go get on a stage somewhere and make some money tonight? I do need a new job so that sounds easy. That all said I actually am not convinced its real, I'm just not convinced its all horse poo poo either.
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Aleph Null posted:You need skills on how to read and manipulate people. Otherwise, you'd be a crap "hypnotist" and your shows would bomb. Manipulate how? Into being hypnotized or into faking it on your behalf? It seems to me that currently there is no way to distinguish scientifically between the two, which isn't to say the former is impossible, just not verifiable. Which forces people to rely on anecdotal evidence such as my experience with my friend's twin. Granted I know that's lovely proof, because its not proof whatsoever. I think this is what the thread has been trying to get out of the OP the whole time, but is there any distinguishing between a hypnotized person and a someone faking it really well? I used to sleep walk a lot, I remember one time while sleep walking I told my dad I couldn't get back in bed because "I'm as big as Jupiter, I can't fit" it was winter so he jokingly suggested I go sleep on the trampoline then since its bigger. I started to head right out the back door to go do that until he stopped me. I definitely wasn't faking it, but he definitely caught me in a state of hyper-suggestibility or whatever you want to call it. So I guess I'm positive the proper state of mind exists. But is the argument over where or not it can be induced intentionally by just talking to someone? I did a lot of rambling here haha sorry. Thoughts all over the place but it is what it is. Space T Rex fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Aug 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:If they're gullible enough you can convince them that they are in a sleepwalking-like state, though--and this does not mean they are "faking it", just that they've been very thoroughly deceived. That looks like a description of what hypnotism is, what am I missing? Because I doubt that's what you intended. But you just said you can, by just talking to someone, put them into a state of mind in which they will unwittingly act out suggestions you give them. Now, I know you said "convince them they're in a state of mind that..." and not actually put them into such a state, but what is the difference functionally? Its maybe not a "a state of mind in which you are hypnotized" but a "state of mind in which you think you're in a state of mind in which you're hypnotized" which is clearly not ones normal state of mind, a switch has been made. If the result is the same in the sense that they are doing the commands yet are not faking loss of self control, then its hypnotism - even if not by the same means hypnotists claim its done.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:If they're gullible enough you can convince them that they are in a sleepwalking-like state, though--and this does not mean they are "faking it", just that they've been very thoroughly deceived. Although you're right by the logic of the statement you quoted, yes that would include pretty much all persuasion. I'd have to change it to "If the result is the same in the sense that they are doing the commands yet are not faking loss of self control, YET have lost self control - then its hypnotism." If what that describes is not your "tricked into a sleepwalking like state" example, then what is the point of tricking someone into that state in the first place, as opposed to just trying to select people you think will fake it? Space T Rex fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Aug 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:This entire thread is a variant of a discussion about the chinese room in that there's outwardly no distinction and people will disagree extremely loudly about what that means I was gonna say philosophical zombie theory but that's been my take.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Oh so your argument is just a denial of the premise that's its real. Do you have an argument to support that or...? Again, I'm not convinced it's real myself it just seems silly to be so positive that its not when the culmination of your argument comes to a head at "naw uh no its not". So what if neurological studies haven't been able to define details yet, that means its either complicated, fake, difficult to define, has lots of variability, or many other things. But its not evidence that solely asserts its completely fake.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
twodot posted:If hypnotism is something more than that, then we need to people who think that to come up with rigorous definitions that can be tested. Do you think consciousness exists within other people? You're going to have to provide with with a testable definition to prove it otherwise I'm going to say it doesn't. I have no idea what your background is so I'm not trying to be condescending when I explain myself, but it can't be done. Its the Philosophical Zombie theory I mentioned earlier. True consciousness and prefect faked consciousness are indistinguishable, so scientific testing is not always the end-all-be-all in determining whether something is certain or not. Its inductive by nature, its limited. This matter of hypnotism is just the same, it may be impossible to give a testable definition but that doesn't mean its fake. Sure it gives us the right to be skeptical but not the right to deny it altogether. Space T Rex fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Aug 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
So then your opinion is that maybe its real maybe its not, who knows? Cause same my dude. Were tight now.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 23:01
|
|