|
Space T Rex posted:That looks like a description of what hypnotism is, what am I missing? 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
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 11:55 |
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:The problem is that hypnosis does not involve a loss of self control any more than any other form of persuasion. Hypnotists (including the OP) will consistently tell you that no matter how susceptible to hypnosis someone is, there is always going to be some line that they will not cross. These lines are largely arbitrary and are not consistent with any neurological or psychological definitions beyond "things they really, really don't want to do." In this regard hypnosis is indistinguishable from ordinary methods of persuasion. Yeah dude and there's no difference in the method between telling someone you'll give them a dollar and a million dollars, but only one of those is going to get you to act like a duck on stage.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Here's my hot take: Hypnotism is essentially sleight of mind meant to create a suggestible state. There's a preexisting framework of what hypnotism should be, and if you follow that framework with people who want to be hypnotized, bam, their mind thinks they're hypnotized and follows along because that's just what's supposed to happen. A parallel is the alleged holy power of big tent preachers, because they follow a known framework that makes people suggestible enough to feel the power of god. Offering money isn't the same because people see money as an exchange rather than a blank check to do whatever someone tells you to do, and if they need to do something embarrassing, they'll usually do the bare minimum to meet whatever the agreement was, making for a poo poo show. Also you couldn't make money doing this
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Also this sentiment that all forms of persuasion bring out the same behavior becomes deeply stupid when you trot out loving money as an example
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:I feel like your position isn't actually all that far off of mine; I agree 100% on the first part. Obviously you and I do not see eye to eye on the second part, but have you really never seen someone get really into a wacky game show? Candid Camera? Arguably reality TV qualifies too--there's a lot of deceptive editing and behind the scenes prodding involved but they still have no problem getting people to do plenty of uncharacteristically embarrassing and stupid stuff, often without any really credible promise of reward. It's not about the money per se. Have you been to a hypnotist stage show? There's a noticeable difference in behavior between those and reality TV. Even in the show itself you can see the juxtaposition of behavior between people who follow the hypnosis framework and the people who know there's an audience.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Straight White Shark posted:Sure, to some extent. It's not an entirely binary state, though, since it's an entirely subjective experience. The hypnosis framework means different things to different people. And in practical terms, there's still not actually that much difference between someone who believes in it and someone who doesn't, so long as they're sufficiently motivated and committed to it. There's nothing that they actually do within the hypnosis framework that can't be duplicated outside of it. Do you have an example of stage hypnosis behavior being duplicated?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
twodot posted:This is a cool paper, but there's literally no reason at all to think that stage performers are even attempting to perform the same routine as what was studied, or even if they are attempting the same routine that they are successful at it, or even if they were successful, that some rear end in a top hat isn't just pretending to subjectively believe their left arm is paralyzed because it's a way better story then that one time you spent $100 bucks on a show, and nothing interesting happened, and you just burned $100 and 2 hours of your life for no reason. If youre trying to dispel the charlatanry of hypnosis it helps to bring out a theory that isnt supremely dumb
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
One neat trick to turn buyers remorse into perfect acting. Skeptics hate it!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 11:55 |
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yea, it's called "I told my drunk friend to do something stupid and he did it." Well when a hypnotist starts just liquoring people up on stage let me know so I can volunteer
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2017 14:37
|
|