Dr. Dylan MorganM.A.(Oxon.), D.Phil.(Oxon.), MNCP, MNCH

Leeds Hypnotherapist

Tel. (0113) 2306333. Leeds Complementary Therapy Centre, 249a Otley Rd. LS16 5LQ. Multimap

HOME
EMAIL ME
LIBRARY
LINKS

Website by
Dylan Morgan

Principles of Hypnotherapy

Dylan Morgan

THIS ALSO AVAILABLE IN PAPERBACK for those who prefer a traditional book that they can read anywhere. You can find it via your bookseller or Booksort.com or myself.

If you would first like to read other people's opinions of this book go to Comments.

THIS BOOK is arranged in three parts: A, B and C.

Part A, like the root system of a plant, is a foundation. It brings into mind some of the materials that will be needed for the remainder of the book. These chapters are only loosely connected to each other.

Part B, like the stem of a plant, develops the central theme of the book, which is the key processes involved in Hypnotherapy. These chapters are strongly connected and should be read in order.

Part C, like the leaves or fruit of a plant, spreads out again. These chapters are all developments from the ideas of Part B, but are not otherwise connected strongly. They can be read in almost any order, and are intended to stimulate thought in a variety of new directions.

PART A

Introduction

This describes the kind of book you are reading. It is a book which is devoted to presenting a unified theoretical view of the subject. In this way it is new and unique. It does not present any new facts, but rather arranges the facts in a new light. It presents a new paradigm for Hypnosis.

WHAT KIND of book is this?

This question is an important one. In order to get the best out of a book we need to approach it with the right mind-set.

This book is a paradigm-changing book: it aims to present a fresh way of looking at the field of Hypnotherapy.

It was in 1962 that Kuhn introduced the notion of a paradigm shift to describe a process that has happened in many fields of science at many times. The second edition of his book will be found in the list of References under Kuhn (1970)Bib. It concerns a fundamental change in the way in which the phenomena of the field are viewed, and consequently in the way things are done. In Kuhn's view such a change has the nature of a revolution. His book itself introduced a paradigm shift in the field of the theory of scientific ideas. A good survey of his ideas and of those of others who do not agree with him is given by Casti (1989)Bib.

Since this book presents a paradigm shift it is a book of ideas. It will therefore stand or fall on the success of these ideas. They will be a success if they help others to make sense of Hypnotherapy.

We may contrast this with some books which it is NOT.

It is NOT a book which claims to present any new FACTS about Hypnosis. If it were it would contain a number of detailed accounts of specific new experiments and their results: it does not.

It is NOT a compendium or encyclopaedia of known facts about Hypnotherapy. If it were, it would contain thousands of references to the work of thousands of other workers and what they have discovered: it does not. It would also be a great deal thicker.

It is NOT a history. If it were it would deal exclusively with ideas and practices from the past. It does not.

It is NOT a handbook of techniques. Although various techniques will be mentioned, they are there only to illustrate and illuminate the theory. A handbook would aim to give extensive lists of techniques. This does not.

It is NOT a "Teach yourself Hypnotherapy" book. Although you will learn a lot about Hypnotherapy, this book will not, in itself, qualify you to be a Hypnotherapist. That requires in addition a lot of practical experience and a lot of detailed information that you would need to acquire from the kinds of books mentioned above.

It is NOT one of those Elixir of Life books which claims to have found some totally new and remarkably simple method of solving all human ills.

It is none of those things. It IS a book which aims to change in a fundamental and useful way the manner in which we think about the subjects of Hypnosis and Hypnotherapy. Books of this nature are rare - and they are exciting.

Not only does it give a new perspective, it generates new insights into the processes used. Furthermore it leads to a clear and original description of the process of diagnosis in Hypnotherapy - something which is notably absent in other books on the subject.

The association of Hypnosis with therapy is not new. By that name it was first used by the Scottish doctor, James Braid, then practising in Manchester, in the 1840s. Related practices, under other names, were used in healing by Mesmer and his followers in the 17th century and by priest and shaman as far back as the dawn of recorded history.

Over the centuries many books have been written about Hypnosis in the context of therapy. The common characteristic of all these books is that they deal extensively with HOW to create the many phenomena we associate with Hypnotism but give very little idea of WHY the methods work. There is very little theory. They are therefore of little help when a method does NOT work, which is a matter of some importance to the practitioner of Hypnotherapy.

The early days of most sciences are marked by this same feature. Early chemistry consisted of a collection of recipes, "If you add this to that then the following happens..." There was no real understanding of WHY or HOW it happened. Early medicine was the same. It had a large collection of procedures and treatments, but only vague ideas as to HOW they worked (when they did). In the light of our present understanding, moreover, we can see that the theoretical ideas they did have - such as the Hippocratic idea of Humours - were inadequate and faulty in the extreme, leading for example to quite unnecessary and potentially dangerous bloodletting on a massive scale.

When a science has reached a certain degree of maturity, as a result of the accumulated experiences of many workers, there comes a stage in which partial, and hard-won, experiences may coalesce to form one uniform picture which makes sense of a whole field. An example of this was the introduction into chemistry of the atomic theory by Dalton (1808)Bib, which was a big paradigm shift and the foundation of all subsequent understanding in the field.

It is the contention of this book that Hypnotherapy has come of age, and that it is now possible to describe in some detail a theoretical framework within which Hypnotic phenomena can be produced and understood in a systematic way.

This book is written with three classes of readers in mind. The central class consists of students: people who are learning the skills of Hypnotherapy. There are increasing numbers of these as this form of therapy becomes more popular. They can expect to find this book a unique aid to understanding what it is that they are learning to do.

On one side of these are individuals who already have an extensive understanding of Hypnotherapy, whether as practitioners or as experimentalists. For these individuals this book may be seen as a codification of ideas that are floating in the pool of common consciousness of Hypnotherapists in this day and age: it crystallises these ideas; it makes them more definite and clear; it unites them in a common pattern. Some of the ideas presented here have already been published in journals read by professionals and found a ready response. The paradigm shift involved does not involve the shattering of existing ideas for most professionals. It is more a matter of drawing together all that we know and do in a systematic way and then building on that foundation a strong new understanding.

On the other side of the centre is the group of intelligent readers who want to know what Hypnosis and Hypnotherapy are all about, though with no intention of using them in person. This will include students of psychology and medicine, but also many of the millions of people who like to know "how things work", and in particular "how people work". Hypnotherapy is intimately involved with the ways in which people's minds and bodies work: arguably the most fascinating subject for everyone outside their own speciality.

With this readership in mind the language has been kept comparatively simple. A minimum level of specialised vocabulary is used, and a minimum amount of prior knowledge assumed.

Having said that, it has been my experience that the concepts are grasped most readily by men and women who are working at the higher levels of many fields such as management, education or consultancy. They seem naturally to think in terms of systems and processes: an ability that I suppose is correlated with degree of intelligence. It may well be then that a certain level of intelligence is a prerequisite to grasping the ideas in their abstract form. However, I have supplied many concrete examples to minimise this problem.

The theoretical framework described here, although proposed as a basis for understanding Hypnotherapy, is in fact rich and powerful enough also to provide a fresh perspective on a very much wider arena of human behaviour, whether individual or in groups such as families or organisations. It is hoped that it will open up new ways of thinking to others as it has to the author.

It will seem to outsiders that the Hypnotherapist does not hold a central position in the world of ideas: I certainly thought so myself at one time. But I have gradually come to realise that in terms of understanding how people work it is a position second to none.

This is because it combines the maximum opportunity for observation with the maximum opportunity for making changes and seeing the results.

The Hypnotherapist sees people from all ranks of life. People open up and disclose their innermost feelings and thoughts to the Hypnotherapist, so that a full picture emerges of the entire course of people's lives.

The Hypnotherapist is not restricted to working with people in whom there is a severe mental malfunction as are Psychiatrists for the most part. He or she is instead often working with healthy and typical people who want help with a single problem in an otherwise satisfactory life or to improve their performance in some way. Consequently the Hypnotherapist can form a clear idea of the range of ways that people normally deal with life: there is not the Psychiatrist's exclusive emphasis on severe malfunction.

Compared with many other related fields such as counselling or psychoanalysis, the Hypnotherapist is expected to a far greater degree actively to change things: a variety of things in a variety of people. This seems to me to be of far-reaching importance. The scientific revolution which began around the seventeenth century was a result of men who were not, in the Greek tradition, restricted to contemplation and reflection in the pursuit of truth, but who had hands-on experience.

There is nothing like trying to make a change and failing, to drive home the fact that you do not understand what you are doing. When your livelihood depends on making successful changes it concentrates the mind still better. If, on the other hand, it is possible to take an ivory-tower approach and to build a theory on the basis of what has been merely read, then there is little chance of any immediate feedback to prove the theory wrong.

Later on in this book we will find much on the importance of feedback loops. In the present context I will observe that improvement in any skill or ability depends on a feedback loop in which execution is followed by an assessment of how successful that execution has been, which is followed by an appropriate modification and further executions. That is how the Wright brothers learned to fly. That is how anyone learns to play golf. That is how babies learn to co-ordinate their limbs. That is how science has grown.

The Hypnotherapist is in the position of having immediate feedback, perhaps within minutes, quite usually within an hour and always within days to test how successful he or she has been in effecting a change.

As a matter of contrast, many Psychoanalysts work over periods of years with a Client. The feedback is so slow, I wonder it can ever have any effect on practice. Research Psychologists are disciplined to work with a very small area of human psychology; each experiment can take months or years, and can lead only to knowing a lot about very little. Psychologists who build theories on the results of the work of such painstaking research inevitably spend most of their lives in libraries and laboratories: they have little chance to get any feedback by putting their ideas into any kind of practice. Many counsellors are constrained by present conventions to be non-directive: that is to say they are supposed NOT to make direct changes, but rather to somehow create an environment in which the Clients will make changes for themselves. Since there is so little action, there is limited scope for feedback also.

In addition, many such professionals are working in salaried positions: which has two drawbacks. One is that they involve extensive costs in terms of the time that has to be spent on the organisation - the committees, the paperwork, the administration, etc. - which reduces either or both of the time available for original thought and the time spent dealing with clients or patients. The second is that since the salary cheque is only very, very loosely connected with success at helping people as contrasted with making a good impression on the System, there is not the same direct and immediate incentive to improve at the cutting edge of the work.

The Professional Hypnotherapist - by which I mean an intelligent man or woman who devotes his or her whole life to the field, not someone who is a professional in some other field like medicine and does a little Hypnosis on the side - is, by contrast, in a perfect position to devote ALL his or her time to studying and changing the functioning of other people with ample and immediate feedback available. This is the optimum position to be in in any field. I, personally, have adopted and then discarded because they failed me in practice, hundreds of different partial theoretical structures before finally evolving that which is presented in this book, which has passed the hard test of day-to-day work and also exposure to my professional peers.

My initial training and doctorate were in Mathematics with a strong leaning to Theoretical Physics. These force you to think clearly and deeply and honestly about the structures and dynamics of things. Ideas must be as crisp as possible: woolliness of thought is a sin. When I plunged into the world of Hypnotherapy, I found none of the precision of thought I was used to, no systematic approach, no theory worthy of the name. I also found my ego very badly hit every time I failed to help someone. Furthermore I had no salary: Clients are not reimbursed by Health Insurance Policies for Hypnotherapy as yet; neither can they get it free on the National Health Service. When Clients are paying with their own money, they require evidence that the service is worth it. And this is even more true in Yorkshire. The fact that if you make no progress then you make no money concentrates the mind wonderfully, I find. If an idea does not work you reject it at once. Those that survive and evolve in this tough environment are fit and strong and lean and healthy. I hope you will find these qualities throughout this book.

Finally I come to a small matter of how to refer to the approach to Hypnotherapy which has evolved in this way. In my first articles for the European Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, I referred to it as a "Systems-oriented Paradigm for Hypnotic Phenomena". This is a bit of a mouthful, and the Journal used, as a more useful label, the phrase, "the Morgan Proposition". Neither of these lends itself to the formation of a useful adjective: "systematic" is a possible one, but this is too general a word.

As you read the book, you will find that central to the approach is the notion of the functioning of complex organic systems. An alternative adjective could therefore be "organic", but this again is too general. Finally I stumbled on an adjective which is concise, reminds us of this aspect of the theory, is specific and easily memorable: "Morganic". So when, from time to time, it is necessary to distinguish between the approach of this book and other approaches I will use this coined word as a convenient shorthand.

top hypno1.co.uk

Chapter 1. Clearing the Ground.

Here we make sure that we know what certain key words will mean in this book. The word Hypnosis will refer ONLY to the subject and not to some hypothetical state or condition.

OUR TOOLS for understanding are ideas and words. To do a good job tools must be clean and clear. This short chapter does some of this necessary preparation.

Let us begin with the word "hypnosis". It has been used in a number of senses. It is sometimes said that a person is "in hypnosis". Or it might be used in a phrase such as "experimental hypnosis" to mean a field of expertise.

In this book the words "hypnosis" and "hypnotherapy" will refer ONLY to fields of knowledge and skill. They are in the same class as the words "chemistry", "medicine" (as a discipline), "physics", etc.

The reasons why this is important will become clearer later. Briefly it is because the other use conjures up a picture of a subject in a unique "state of hypnosis". Detailed experiments have failed to establish any way of defining such a state or distinguishing it from other, "non-hypnotic states". For the same reason the phrase "a hypnotic trance" will not be used.

On the other hand a field of knowledge is comparatively easy to define. It is characterised by an interest in a certain class of phenomena. The field defined by interest in the weather can be labelled "meteorology", of interest in the past, "history", in books, "literature", in the nerves, "neurology" and so on. Notice that it is the phenomena that define the subject and not the theories or the practices. For example, the techniques used in chemistry have varied enormously over time. Modern equipment is vastly different from nineteenth century equipment: Bunsen didn't start using his burner until 1855! Chemical theories have also changed enormously over time: Dalton's atomic theory only goes back to the beginning of the nineteenth century. In a similar way both the ideas that people have had about the field of Hypnosis and the methods they have used have changed considerably, but the phenomena of interest have remained relatively fixed.

What the Hypnotist is interested in is a certain class of changes in the functioning of the mind and body brought about in a non-physical and naturalistic way. Later on we will list in more detail most of the common such changes, but here we will note a few such things: analgesia - a loss of a sense of pain; amnesia -an induced forgetfulness; involuntary movements induced by suggestion alone; and distortion of the messages of the senses, in which a lemon may be made to taste like an apple, a clearly visible object may not be perceived, or an object may be "seen" though not present.

The Hypnotherapist is more interested in a rather different class of changes, such as recovery of lost memories, removal of old habits or patterns of thought, elimination of tensions, changes in perceptions to bring them more in line with reality, changes in mood and so on: in brief to change things which are perceived as "problems".

When we say that these changes are to be produced in a non-physical way, it implies that the changes are NOT produced by the application of drugs, electricity, magnetism or other physical agency. To say that the changes are produced in a naturalistic way implies that neither are they produced by some strange or unnatural force, power or phenomenon. Hypnotic phenomena are a result of using the natural modes of functioning of the mind and body, but in focused or particular or unusual ways, to produce the desired changes.

It is because we are using only modes of functioning which can exist naturally that no hard line can be drawn between a "state of hypnosis" and any other "state" or mode of functioning of a person. For many people this point cannot be emphasised too much. In the uninformed mind there is a simple picture that being "under hypnosis" is rather like going "under" an anaesthetic: a sudden and dramatic departure of consciousness. While the stage Hypnotist will at times work (with his better Subjects) to approximate to this state of affairs, it has been found by careful experiment that the same phenomena which can be produced under those conditions can also be produced under conditions where there is no such dramatic change.

A related error can be typified by a recent enquiry to me: "Can Hypnosis be used to improve my memory, so that I could pick up and learn a telephone directory?" This is effectively equivalent to being able effortlessly to be a chess Master, a scratch golfer, etc. The normal rules of functioning of the mind and body demand that practice, and a lot of it, is necessary to develop such skills. Hypnotic techniques may be used to increase motivation, to reduce distracting thoughts and to optimise the results of practice, but they are always working on natural systems which have their own rules and therefore limitations. You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

There is a lot of power and potential in Hypnotic techniques, but they are not magic: not contrary to the laws of physics, chemistry or neurology. It is easily possible to get a person to feel themselves too heavy to get off a chair. But it will not result in any extra pressure on the chair.

Two other words that will be used in this book are Subject and Client. The former will normally refer to a person whose functioning is being changed by a Hypnotist, and the latter by a Hypnotherapist. Some Hypnotherapists use the term Patient in place of Client.

SUMMARY

HYPNOSIS is the area of knowledge concerned with certain naturalistic changes in the functioning of the mind and nervous system.

HYPNOTHERAPY is the application of such knowledge to help individuals with a related class of problems.

We will not use the concept of a "state of hypnosis" in this book.

top hypno1.co.uk

Chapter 2. Hypnotic Phenomena.

IN ORDER TO GET a clearer view of the Subject matter of Hypnosis we will next look at some of the more common phenomena which have been reliably produced in certain people in an experimental setting as well as by Hypnotherapists or stage Hypnotists.

There is no real disagreement about the existence of these phenomena. Others may be added to the list below and there can be disagreement over the precise nature of what is happening in them and also about theories designed to explain how they are happening. But there is general agreement that the phenomena do characterise the field of Hypnosis.

In each of these examples it must be remembered that no claim is made that the particular phenomenon can be produced with equal ease in everyone, nor that it will be possible in everyone. Remember that we are dealing with naturalistic phenomena.

The fact that some individuals are colour blind does not invalidate the phenomenon of full colour vision in others. The fact that some individuals have poor memories and take a lot of time to learn things does not negate the achievements of certain individuals who can memorise enormous amounts quickly. The fact that not everybody can run a mile in under 6 minutes does not affect the fact that a great number could, with practice, or that there are many who can run it in under 4 minutes. Neither does the fact that the world record time has been reducing allow us to deduce that a 2 minute mile will some day be possible.

The general principles of ALL human behaviour or achievement are that there is a range in the capacity of different individuals to produce certain behaviour; that anyone's capacity can be improved by proper practice; and that there are natural limits to what can be done.

If Hypnosis dealt with phenomena which did NOT obey these principles it would be a very strange Subject indeed.

Consequently in reading the following, remember always that each example is something that can be produced to a high degree quite easily in some people, to a lesser degree and/or in more time in others, and finally to no significant extent in any reasonable time with yet others. It is also a fact that there is only a loose correlation between an individual's capacity to produce one phenomenon and another, rather in the way that if you are very good at geography there is a better than average chance that you will also be good at history, but it is far from certain.

The stage Hypnotist works within these constraints of nature by selecting from the audience, by means of various tests, those individuals in which the phenomena of interest can be produced most easily. The Hypnotherapist, who has to work with a wider range of individuals, will tend to use more time and a variety of methods in order to offset the limitations that may arise in a particular individual.

Some Hypnotic Phenomena

In the following list the phenomena are grouped into those areas of the brain or nervous system or body which they involve.

VOLUNTARY MUSCULAR SYSTEM

At one time it was a popular part of a demonstration of stage Hypnotism for the Hypnotist to get a Subject to go completely rigid. So great was this rigidity that the Subject could be supported on two chairs by his head and heels alone. And as if this were not enough the Hypnotist would be able to sit or stand on the supported body with no complaint from the Subject or yielding of his body! This has now been banned in the UK by the Hypnotism Act of 1952, as it could lead to physical damage.

At the opposite extreme from this, it is comparatively easy to induce in those same large muscles of the body an extreme limpness or relaxation which is so great that the Subject feels unable to move them.

In between these extremes there are a variety of phenomena in which a large group of muscles - those of an arm, perhaps - will move in response not to the perceived will of the Subject, but rather in response to verbal suggestions from the Hypnotist.

INVOLUNTARY MUSCULAR SYSTEM

There are many muscles in the body which we do not normally expect to be able to control at will. These include the heart, which is one big muscle, the small muscles which expand and contract to control the flow of blood through veins and arteries, and the muscles of the stomach and alimentary system which push the food along its way.

Hypnotic techniques have been shown to be able to affect these. Heart rate may be increased quite a lot, and reduced to a lesser extent. The flow of blood can be altered so that, for example, it can be increased to warm the feet or decreased to cool them. The flow of blood to the face can be altered in order to induce or reduce blushing. And so on.

SENSORY SYSTEMS

Another popular phenomenon for the stage Hypnotist is to get a Subject to eat an onion under the impression that it is an apple. In order for this to be possible - and with every indication of enjoyment - there must have been changes in that person's perception of taste, smell and also vision.

In general it is possible to change the messages from any sense. The sense of touch can be altered either so that a certain kind of numbness results in which a touch cannot be felt at all, or, conversely, so that it reports the presence of a stimulus which has no basis in reality - for example, that an insect is crawling over the skin. Glove anaesthesia is a term often used in Hypnotherapy to describe a situation in which nothing is felt in one or both hands up to the wrist - as if a thick glove is being worn which makes it impossible to feel things.

The related sense of pressure can likewise be affected, all the way from feeling no sensation of the pressure of the body on the chair to a great sensation of pressure on the chest which has no outward cause, for example.

The sense of smell may be affected either to produce anosmia - the absence of all sensation of smell - or to change the perceptions so that one smell becomes interpreted as another. A pleasant scent can be made to smell like hydrogen sulphide - rotten eggs - or ammonia like a rose.

The related sense of taste can likewise be affected to change either the quality of the taste or its intensity. Sweet can turn to sour and vice versa, or can simply vanish.

The sense of hearing can be affected so that the Subject fails to respond at all to a certain class of sounds, while remaining aware of others - for example, he may remain aware of the Hypnotist's voice, but unaware of anyone else or any background noise.

The sense of sight can be affected in a similar way so that things which are there may not be noticed and things which are not present are visualised as vividly as if they were there. A popular stage trick is to give the Subject "X-ray glasses" which seem to be able to see through the clothes of anyone looked at.

The sense of orientation may be altered so that, for example, a feeling of lying at a steep angle can be induced in a person lying horizontally, or a feeling of falling in someone who is standing vertically.

The sense of temperature may be affected so that a part or whole of the body is perceived as being either hotter or colder than it is in reality, though there is no change measurable by a thermometer.

The sense of pain, though it is so much more acute than the other senses, follows the same pattern. Because of its importance it has received a great deal of experimental attention and the basic facts have been established conclusively. It is indeed true that a person can be induced by Hypnotic procedures to be consciously aware of less pain in a given circumstance, or, on the other hand, of more.

HABITUAL SYSTEMS

A typical habit is a complex pattern of behaviour which is carried out automatically with little or no conscious thought. Although it may involve the same groups of muscles that are involved in the phenomena mentioned above, it is really a higher order phenomenon of the nervous system. Such habits are regulated primarily by a part of the brain called the cerebellum - and altering habits is therefore altering the functioning of a part of the brain.

For the stage Hypnotist the task is often to establish a new habit, such as standing and declaiming something when a certain piece of music plays. For a Hypnotherapist the task is the more difficult one of preventing a long-established habit, such as smoking or nail-biting, from continuing.

EMOTIONAL SYSTEMS

The emotions tend to shade into each other more gradually than do the senses: it is hard to put a clear line between a pleasure and happiness in the way that we can distinguish touch and pain, for example. But the principles we have seen above in the senses continue to hold in the sphere of the emotions. Whether we consider love, liking, excitement, pleasure, happiness, or fear, anger, grief, guilt, depression or any other shade of feeling, it is true that they can be induced or suppressed or altered in quality.

Although feelings do not seem to us to be localised, in terms of our physiology they are primarily a function of a certain structure in the brain called the limbic system. So in altering emotions we are again dealing with a part of the brain. This part is in direct contact with a small gland in the brain called the thalamus, which produces hormones which in turn affect other endocrine glands in the body. The best known of these are the adrenal gland and the ovaries or testes.

If a person is induced by some Hypnotic technique to feel fear or excitement then the adrenal glands respond as a part of the process. This underlines the fact that Hypnotic techniques can also affect the functioning of the endocrine system. Another example might be the arousal or suppression of sexual feelings, which would be accompanied by changes in the level of sexual hormones.

RELATIONSHIPS

Of very great importance to most people are their relationships with others. A relationship is a complex pattern of feelings and habitual actions and responses in two or more people, so it involves systems which have been mentioned above. Very often the problem presented to the Hypnotherapist lies in this area, and the task is to sort out what parts of the complex pattern it is best to change in order to improve matters. Insofar as it is possible to alter feelings and actions by Hypnotic techniques, it is by the same token possible to alter the course of a relationship.

IMMUNE SYSTEM

Scattered through the literature on the subject there are accounts of the use of Hypnotic techniques to influence the body's ability to react to a wide range of illnesses, including cancer. Perhaps the best evidence underpinning the validity of these reports is the very well-attested fact of the Placebo Response. This simply says that for virtually any illness there will be a certain proportion of sufferers who will recover significantly better if they are given something that they believe will work, even if it is totally neutral medicinally. Insofar as Hypnotic techniques can evidently change an individual's belief about all manner of things, as we have seen, there is every reason to suppose that it can act as well as, if not better than the beliefs involved in the Placebo Response to help people's bodies to heal themselves.

MENTAL SYSTEMS

We have seen that emotions and habits are both properly seen to be functions of the brain, though they may not be thought to be so by the man in the street. We will now consider a few more functions of the brain which are more obviously so.

Memory is a particular function of the brain which has also been demonstrably affected by Hypnotic procedures. It, also, can be enhanced, inhibited, made selective or falsified. On the stage a popular alteration is to make the Subject forget some quite simple thing, like the name of a colour or the number 7. The Subject may struggle very hard to recall the missing fact but fail totally. An alternative is to get him to believe that something is true or has happened which has not. If a Subject is induced to "remember" that another person has cheated him in some way, he will start to act in a way which is amusing to the audience. But the serious side to this is that certain individuals can be influenced to believe that they have remembered episodes or early sexual abuse which never in fact happened. The problems that can arise from this are termed the False Memory Syndrome.

Concentration is another high-order mental faculty which can be intimately affected by Hypnotic techniques. It is not uncommon to come across cases in which the Subject responds exclusively to the voice of the Hypnotist, and seems totally oblivious to all else. This is a particular case of total concentration. Equally it can be possible to make concentration on any subject very difficult.

More generally the entire mental framework can be altered, as when a Subject can be induced to imagine himself to be Elvis Presley, or some other person, and act, respond and answer questions from the viewpoint of that person.

Since this book is not encyclopaedic there is no need to list ALL possibilities. Enough has now been said to indicate something of the range of changes that have been recorded.

SUMMARY

Hypnotic procedures have been demonstrated in laboratories and elsewhere to produce a wide range of changes in the functioning of human beings. Something of the range has been listed above.

top hypno1.co.uk

Chapter 3. Introducing Systems.

A very important idea which is central to future development is that of systems, and particularly organic systems. This chapter introduces some of the basic properties of systems which will recur throughout the book, primarily their level of activity, and the most basic ways in which they might affect each other. An important shorthand notation is also presented.

IN THE LAST CHAPTER the word "system" frequently arose. In our growing understanding of the functioning of body and brain, scientists have come to recognise the nature and modes of functioning of many systems in the body. There are the nervous system, the digestive system, the cardiovascular system, the limbic system, the endocrine system, the immune system, the muscular system and so on.

Each of these systems has an identifiable structure. The nerves are the physical structure of the nervous system; the heart plus veins and arteries and their associated small muscles form the structure of the cardiovascular system, and so on. But equally, if not more, important are the processes which the system undergoes. The existence of the heart has been known since prehistoric time. But the fact that it circulates the blood only became understood with William Harvey (1578-1637) in the early seventeenth century. The existence of the major planets of our solar system was also known from prehistoric times, but the principles of their movements were only properly described by Newton (1642-1727) in the latter half of the seventeenth century. To get any proper idea of a system we must know how it works; what kinds of processes it undergoes; what are the principles governing those processes.

The difference is related to the difference between seeing a thing in static terms and dynamic terms. This great change has taken place in a multitude of sciences, and each time has heralded a great increase in understanding. Darwin's Theory of Evolution is an example of a change from a view which held that species were fixed to one in which they changed in certain ways for specific reasons. The theory of continental drift has similarly transformed geology.

As a simple analogy illustrating this matter from another angle, consider the position of a car mechanic. He might well be able to put quite a few things right by following a few tried and tested procedures that he has found to be effective in some instances. But unless he understands the principles governing the function of the various parts of the machine, his ability is going to be strictly limited: he will have no real idea of why the changes he makes are effective, and so his work will remain rather hit and miss. He has to know how and why the parts move or operate in order to understand things properly.

It will be clear from the last chapter that the field of interest of Hypnotherapy is intimately involved with the functioning of effectively all the major systems of the mind and body. In order to understand what we are doing we are therefore forced to give thought to understanding the nature of these organic systems, and in particular to understanding their modes of functioning and interacting. There is no option. The phenomena are clear. That they involve changes to systems of the body is clear. That the changes are not to their structure (we are not surgeons) is clear. That we change the behaviour is clear. Consequently we are dealing with the dynamics of complex organic systems. If we are to form an idea of the principles of Hypnosis we are therefore forced to start with a picture, however simple, of the dynamics of the organic or biological subsystems of human beings.

The study of the dynamics of organic systems in general is a growth area: it is highly relevant to economics, ecology, sociology and biology, and has been approached from all those areas. I have not been able to find an existing approach, however, which is well-adapted to the kinds of systems and dynamics involved in Hypnosis. The following language and methodology is therefore designed specifically to be useful in our field, though it can be generalised to others.

How does one start to design a dynamical theory? It is a tried and trusted principle that one should as far as possible work with observables. To base a theory on unobservables is to be working in the dark: there is no way of verifying if the theory is right or wrong and no way of refining it. What observables therefore can we say are applicable to all the systems of mind and body in which we are interested?

The answer which I will adopt is: the level of activity.

It is possible, by means of very fine electrodes, to measure quite precisely the level of activity of a single neuron (nerve cell). It is easily possible to measure the mean activity of the heart - the heart rate. It is possible to get a good measure of the level of activity of a muscle by means of seeing what force it can resist, or by its oxygen consumption. The overall level of activity of a region of the brain can be estimated by measuring the rise in temperature of that region (a method used over a century ago) or more modern methods involving measuring electrical activity (EEG) or local blood flow and metabolism - positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The activity of various glands can be estimated by measuring the concentration of the hormones they produce in the blood. And so on. Although the functions of the various systems are of course distinct, we can in each case form at last a qualitative and very often a precise quantitative measure of its activity at a given time, and hence how its activity is changing with time.

Later, in Part C, we will discuss a more exact definition of activity, applicable to all systems, but at this introductory level it is enough to note that the intuitively clear notion of activity is something that is in principle observable for systems of the body. We will therefore base our theory on the notion of the activity of a system.

Let us now take a very brief look at a simple Hypnotic process with this idea in mind. A fairly typical Hypnotic induction as used by a Hypnotherapist today may proceed as follows. First of all the Subject's eyes may be induced to close, by one of a number of methods which usually involve fixing the gaze on some point, and some form of verbal suggestion that eyes will get tired until they close. However it is done, it is clear that the result must be a great reduction in the activity of the whole of the part of the visual system involved in viewing the external world. With the eyes closed all the nerves from the retinas to the visual cortex will become quiescent.

A typical second step is to encourage physical relaxation. This again may be accomplished in a variety of ways: each group of muscles may first be tensed so that there will be a natural rebound into a more relaxed state; there may simply be a focus of attention on groups of muscles and a suggestion of relaxation; there may be the creation of an imaginary scenario such as a warm beach, which is designed to induce relaxed feelings. But however it is done the result is a great reduction of the activity of the main voluntary muscles, and very often the involuntary ones as well.

It will be noticed that a typical induction process is a one-way affair. Unless a question is asked, the Client does not talk. This is usually accomplished by the Hypnotist maintaining a steady flow of speech in which there are no cues for the Subject to respond verbally. But however it is done, the result is that the active speech-producing system often becomes very inactive.

The pattern is clear. The Hypnotherapist is reducing the activity of nearly all systems one by one. Higher-order faculties which are harder to observe, such as an internal verbal analysis of what is going on and a critical analysis of its content, are typically also reduced. There is, however, at least one exception to the general rule that systems are inactivated: and that is the aural system. The Subject must continue to be able to hear the Hypnotherapist. Ideally this system should become more active than usual: the intention is for the listener to respond more than usual to what is said by the Hypnotherapist. This may be accompanied by a reduction of attention to other sounds. Another possible exception will be a particular other system that the Hypnotist is aiming to change: it may well be that the goal is to enhance its activity. The Hypnotherapist may, for example, be aiming to enhance a memory or to activate the imagination.

So the total pattern of what the Hypnotherapist is doing can be charted in reasonable detail by noting the levels of activity of various systems and whether their activity is tending to increase or decrease.

It may be useful to some readers to picture things as follows. Let every major system of the brain and body be represented by a large dial, and an adjacent knob. Beneath each large dial can be placed a collection of smaller ones indicating the level of activity of the subsystems. Through the course of a normal day the needles on the dials are flickering, and most of the time indicating quite large levels of activity for most of the systems. The above Hypnotic induction can then be pictured in terms of the Hypnotherapist slowly turning knob after knob, turning down all those systems which are not relevant to the task in hand, and turning up those which are.

This brief example should illustrate the relevance of the level of activity of systems in the context of Hypnotherapy. It should show why it is worthwhile considering the dynamics of organic systems at a more abstract level.

In a general form the basic question which underlies understanding any complex thing is, "If I change this, how will it affect that?" We must be able to give at least a qualitative answer to questions of this form if we are to claim to understand what we are dealing with.

As an example of this, Newtonian physics is based on the twin observables of force and acceleration. The basic rule of the dynamics is that, "If I change the force on a particle, then I change the acceleration instantaneously in exact proportion: i.e. if the one doubles, then so does the other."

In our present theoretical structure the only dynamical variable we have so far is the level of activity. The central question we need to answer is therefore, "If I change the level of activity of this system, how will it alter the level of activity of that system?"

In general, such is the complexity of the systems with which we are dealing, we will be unable to give a quantitative answer to this question. But what we may at least be able to do is to discover whether an increase or decrease in the activity of one system acts so as to increase or decrease the activity of another. In other words we may simplify our central question to being one of sign.

Given any two systems A and B, in a given individual, we would like to know whether an increase in the activity of A leads to an increase or decrease in B or has no effect. Likewise we would like to know the effect on B of a decrease in the activity of A.

It might be supposed that if an increase in the activity of A leads to an increase in the activity of B, then a decrease will lead to a decrease in its activity. However this is not necessarily the case when we consider biological systems. We may take as an amusing and illustrative example the analysis in Parkinson's Law (Parkinson (1957)Bib) of the figures for such organic systems as the Colonial Office or the Navy. It is understandable that as the empire increased or the number of ships increased then there should be a corresponding increase in the administrative staff. But the corresponding assumption that the reduction of the size of the empire, or a reduction in the number of fighting ships would also lead to a reduction of the administrators turns out to be quite wrong. If anything the facts suggest that their numbers continued to increase even faster!

Within the human body, an increase in the activity of the nerves running to a muscle typically produce a quick increase in the activity of the muscle, which will contract. A reduction of the activity of the nerves does NOT cause the muscle to expand again. To reverse the effect of that muscle, another muscle has to be called into play. That is why we see the general principle of pairs of opposing muscles throughout the body. There is, for example, a muscle to turn our eyes right, and another to turn them left; one to turn them up and another to turn them down. Other pairs handle diagonal movements.

As another example, the thought of going for a walk may activate the process of walking. The mere fact that this thought is then displaced by another does not stop the walk. It has to be stopped by activation of the thought, "Time to stop".

In the most general terms we may say that the most fundamental organic activity is that of growth. Growth may be activated, and that strongly and exponentially (i.e. doubling repeatedly in a characteristic interval of time), if a favourable environment is provided. On the other hand a removal of that provision does not necessarily lead to an equally rapid decline in the system, for it is the nature of organic systems to be self-preserving. A Government may induce activity in an area of the economy by putting some money into it. But when they stop doing so, that area will not immediately cease activity. Indeed it may respond to the challenge and become even more active.

Within the human body a sight of danger leads to an immediate fear response. The removal of that sight does not immediately induce relaxation. There is a strong asymmetry. It may even be the case that the removal of the sight actually increases the fear, on the grounds that it is better to be able to see a danger than to have it re-appear unexpectedly.

Although this point has been emphasised in the case of organic systems, the principle is familiar even in certain mechanical contexts. Motor vehicles have a brake and an accelerator, one to slow you down and the other to speed you up. Simply taking your foot off the accelerator does very little indeed to stop you. Simply taking your foot off the brake does not cause you to accelerate at all. And notice that in order to drive a car you need only know which pedal is which. You only need to know the sign of their effects. The exact mathematical expression for how the velocity of the car varies with the pressure on the pedals is immaterial to the basic operation.

And this illustrates in the context of controlling organic systems why it is often enough to know the sign of the effect of one system on another.

The next step we will be taking is to streamline the discussion. It is a very good principle of thought, used extensively in mathematics, that if a phrase or sentence arises frequently, a shorthand expression should be found for it. Our brains are severely limited in their capacities. The compression of concepts makes the most of such capacities as we have.

This is a principle I personally find sadly lacking in application in books written by psychologists who should know better. There are too many people who seem to reason as follows: "Much valuable work is hard to understand. Therefore work which is hard to understand must be valuable. For my work to be valuable it must be hard for others to understand. I will therefore make the syntax and vocabulary as abstruse and complex as possible." It is as if they reasoned, "Most stately homes are hard to find your way around in. Therefore houses which are hard to find your way around in must be stately. For my home to be stately it must be hard for others to find their way around in it. I will therefore fill it with large furniture, screens, wardrobes, etc. which are all as large and difficult to negotiate as possible."

I am acutely aware of the smallness of my mind, and so have to work hard to keep it free from clutter by keeping things as simple as possible in finding my way around complicated things.

So in place of the phrase "an increase in the activity of system A" I will introduce the symbol " ä A". In place of the phrase "a decrease in the activity of system A" I will use " æA". In place of the sentence, "an increase in the activity of system A leads directly to an increase in the activity of system B" I will use the expression " ä A à ä B".

Note: In the book form it was possible to use symbols which are not standard HTML ones, and I used an up arrow for ä, a down arrow for æ, a horizontal arrow for à. Trying to use those symbols led to problems on some browers and so I have used these alternative symbols (which can also be used in email correspondence).The symbol | which will appear below was a double headed vertical arrow.

N.B. The symbols are taken from the "Wingdings" font. If your computer does not have this font the symbols will look strange.

Expressions such as ä A à ä B, æA à ä B and æA à æB can then be read easily.

Since it is useful to discuss situations in which a change in the activity of one system leads to no change in the activity of another, I will also use the symbol " 0B" in place of "no change in the activity of system B". The final symbol which may occasionally be used is " | " which means "an increase or decrease" i.e. some change, where we are not either sure or concerned about its direction.

If we let S = {sympathetic nervous system} and let P = {parasympathetic nervous system} and H = {heart} then we may say that the basic regulation of H follows the pattern that:

ä S à ä H, æS à 0H,

while

ä P à æH and æP à 0H.

I.e. the action of the sympathetic nervous system activates the heart, while a reduction of the heart rate is produced by a direct action of the parasympathetic system (Rathus (1987)Bib). They are rather like accelerator and brake in a motor vehicle.

It is worth noting that the basic concepts introduced so far have a range of applicability from the level of individual nerve cells - neurons - right up to the level of economies or ecosystems. It is known that the direct effect of one neuron on another with which it is in contact is either to excite it (increase its activity) or to decrease it (reduce its activity). The rule does not change from moment to moment or day to day. The pattern of working of the brain is dependent ultimately on the complexity that can arise from such basically simple interactions, when repeated by the billion.

Likewise in an ecosystem in which we may measure the mean activity of a species by its numerical strength, then the effect of a change in the activity of one species on another is also fixed in time. Foxes always prey on rabbits. Rabbits never prey on foxes. If F = {foxes}, R = {rabbits} then:

ä R à ä F à æR à æF à ä R à ...

which is shorthand for "an increase in the number of rabbits leads to an increase in the number of foxes (since they have more to eat), but an increase in the number of foxes acts to decrease the number of rabbits (since they are eaten); such a decrease in the number of rabbits will, in a while, lead to a decrease in the number of foxes (some starve to death), and that in turn will allow the numbers of rabbits to increase again. An increase in the number of rabbits ...." Such a pattern of interaction results in a cycling of the activity of each group. It is actually a negative feedback loop of a kind we will discuss in far more detail in Part B.

It is known from a careful analysis of definite models of organic systems that the result can readily become chaotic, in the strict mathematical sense of the word (Murray (1993)Bib). Roughly speaking this means that even if we know the precise form of the dynamical equations it soon becomes impossible to predict with any accuracy the size of a population at a time in the future. And since in practice we are unlikely to know either the exact form of the equations, or the starting population accurately, the difficulty of exact prediction becomes that much harder. Consequently the analysis of precise models may well tell us very little more than our simple model, which by merely noting the sign of the effects of change actually contains a lot of the useful qualitative dynamics.

These considerations lead to the conclusion that we have found a strong and robust foundation for our subject in the above simple considerations. They are very general, but very clear. They get to the heart of the matter. We will be building on this foundation in Part B, to some effect.

Important note on abbreviations.

There may be some readers who are put off by the notation I have introduced. Anything new can be hard to adapt to. Please note that it is only a form of shorthand. If you think of it as being like the use of abbreviations, such as NCP&HR for the National Council of Psychotherapists and Hypnotherapy Register, you may find it easier to understand what it is about.

But shorthand does take a little time to master. I suggest that when at first you see some you avoid the temptation to let your eye skip over it and simply expand it into the full phrase or sentence it represents until you become familiar with its meaning. In time you will then be able to work simply with the shorthand. Compared with the task of a secretary learning Pitman's shorthand the time and effort involved is very small indeed.

The great strength of a shorthand lies in its simplicity and compactness. We will find this useful when we come to analysing different kinds of processes which arise. I re-emphasise that even arithmetic could not have developed without the use of a good shorthand for the numbers. But of course the use of a shorthand in itself is not mathematics.

The weakness of a shorthand is that it has to be accurate. A one letter mistake in the degree MA can make a Master of Arts into a Doctor of Medicine - MD - something that cannot be achieved by a one letter change to the full phrase.

Finally, for the sake of exactitude, I will make explicit a convention that if a word or phrase is in { } it refers to the activity of a system, while if it is in ( ) it refers to some quantity that is not. Thus it can be useful to write ä (temperature) à ä {sweating}, which would be shorthand for "An increase in the temperature of a person leads to an increase in the activity of the perspiration system". The subtly different expression ä {temperature} à ä (sweating) would mean "An increase in the activity of the sensory system which registers temperature leads to an increase in the measurable sweat produced". This distinction is not of great importance at the level of this book, but could be important as the methods become increasingly precise. For it is NOT always the case that the perceived temperature is the same as the actual temperature and it may not be the case that a given level of activation of the perspiration system always leads to the same level of perspiration.

SUMMARY

The notion of a system has been elaborated mainly through examples.

The notion of the activity of an organic system has been introduced, together with a notation which expresses in a compact form the essential facts regarding the way changes in the activity of one system may affect the activity of another.

It is important to note the general principle of organic systems that reversing the cause does not necessarily reverse the effect.

It has been emphasised that Hypnotic techniques have the effect of altering the level of activity of a very wide variety of systems in the brain and body, which is why this systems-oriented approach to the subject is invaluable if we are to analyse what is happening.

top hypno1.co.uk

Chapter 4. Other Theoretical Approaches.

It is useful next to examine various other theoretical approaches which have been taken to the subject. This overview will deepen the understanding of the newcomer. The range of theories is classified with an eye on the way in which they can be related to particular organic systems. It will be seen that the systems approach gives a way of unifying discussion and analysis of the whole field. The primary conclusion is that previous theoretical models have been based on noticing that Hypnotic techniques change the functioning of one particular system of the mind or body and then extrapolating to the idea that this particular system or change is the key or definitive feature of Hypnosis. Each theory therefore has some truth to teach, but none provides a complete picture.

THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER outlined the concise and general framework for theoretical Hypnosis which will be used in this book. We may now take a look at earlier theories to see how they can be related within this framework.

Although the Hypnotic phenomena described in Chapter 2 have been observed for a very long time - hundreds if not thousands of years in some cases - the nature of what was happening has been understood in very different ways. This chapter will describe the various ideas of what is involved. For convenience these ideas will frequently be associated with the names of their originators or chief proponents. The order in which they are described will be loosely chronological but the intention is not to give a history but rather an overview of the kinds of ways in which our subject has been thought about over the years. In any case the historical development of ideas is seldom straightforward. Similar ideas have a way of arising in several places at the same time, and returning in modified forms at different times. Many different ideas can coexist at the same time. For anyone who is interested in the detailed history of Hypnosis there are some excellent books now available (Gauld (1992), Crabtree (1993)Bib).

The main theoretical approaches can be summarised as follows:

1. Spirit possession.

2. Vital energy effects.

3. Neurological.

4. Suggestion.

5. Sociological.

6. Information.

1. Spirit possession.

When we look back in time through the eyes of history we find that most people most of the time had a total and unquestioning belief in all manner of disembodied spirits. These could be the spirits of the dead - humans or animals, ghosts, evil spirits, good spirits, gods and demons. (Even in this secular age the majority of people I meet seem to retain some form of belief in such things.)

In societies with complete faith in such spirits there would be individuals who claimed to have special powers with regard to them. They might be called shamans or priests or witch-doctors or oracles. Some of their early practices foreshadowed professions which have since become quite distinct. Their practice would often be tied in with the movements of the moon and planets, and so in that way they are the forerunners of astronomers. They would often work with the healing spirits they associated with various substances - animal, vegetable and mineral - and in that way are forerunners of medicine and even chemistry. In creating theories of the origin and meaning of the universe they were the forerunners of philosophers and cosmologists. In their use of music and dramatic enactment to enhance their effect they are also the forerunners of actors and musicians.

It is not therefore surprising that their work also contained the seeds of Hypnotherapy. To our eyes it seems clear that they often used a variety of means to induce in their listeners certain powerful expectations which would then very often have been realised. In terms of healing, a modern interpretation of what they did would be that they used a greatly enhanced placebo response to great effect.

If we stand back and look at the pattern that seems to run through the practice of such people we see the following.

The Practitioner goes through some procedure which he (or she) claims to lead to his or her possession by some powerful spirit. Today this might be termed entering a trance. The usual personality disappears and another takes its place - that of the spirit or god. This powerful spirit then acts on the Client's behalf. Rather more problems would be tackled in this way than we might contemplate today: they could include not only health problems but also divination or procuring good fortune or revenge on an enemy. Notice that the whole focus of attention is on the Practitioner. Although we can expect that the Client will also become strongly expectant of change, and might at times be acted upon to remove a supposed evil spirit which might possess him or her, the focus of the activity is the possession of the Practitioner by a powerful spirit.

It should be noticed that this approach to problems has not died out in the world. There are many today who continue to work within this paradigm. For example there are those working within the healing ministry of various churches who are portraying themselves as channels through which the healing spirit of God can come down for others. Even more similar are the mediums who go into a trance in which they might be "taken over" by the spirit of a Red Indian Guide or the like, and it is that spirit which then supposedly advises or helps.

The only trace of this theme in modern Hypnotherapy is that the Practitioner will typically adopt a professional persona while at work. This has a faint flavour of the practice of the shaman. It is saying non-verbally, "I am no longer the ordinary person you meet in the street. I am now embodying wisdom, knowledge and power to help you. These transcend my personal self."

It is worth looking at a few phenomena from our field to see how they might look from a spirit-world perspective.

There is an established Hypnotic phenomenon of automatic writing. In some Subjects it is not only possible to make a hand rise up into the air with no conscious volition, but also to get it to write words which seem to the Subject to be totally unwilled and unpremeditated. Indeed if the hand is hidden from view there may be no knowledge even that the hand has done any writing (e.g. Gauld (1992)Bib).

A natural spiritual possession interpretation of this is that clearly a foreign spirit has taken over the functioning of the hand, and that the Hypnotherapist has simply acted in such a way as to facilitate it.

Another phenomenon which arises in the field of Hypnosis is that of Clients who seem vividly to recall events which are clearly set in times before they were born. The spiritual possession view of these would naturally be again that the body (like that of the medium) has temporarily been taken possession of by the spirit of someone else who had lived that earlier life, and again that the Hypnotist has acted in a way to facilitate this.

Alternatively it may be said that this phenomenon concerns only one spirit who first lived the past life and is now living the present one. This interpretation is fairly popular with many people today, and is termed Past Life Regression. Examples of instances of the use of Hypnotic techniques to elicit details of past lives are provided by Iverson (1976)Bib. The belief harmonises well with those Eastern philosophies and religions which believe in repeated incarnations of each individual soul. I know of no attempt to distinguish by experiment or theory between the above two interpretations.

Most of the phenomena which today are interpreted as being the results of the functioning of "the subconscious" would be interpreted as being the results of the functioning of "the spirits". We see echoes of this in phrases such as "he is showing his animal spirits", "spirit of inquiry", "she is inspired", etc.

The relief of some bad feeling like a depression or jealousy would be seen as the removal or exorcism of a bad spirit that was possessing the person. The cure of a disease would be by removing the possessing spirit or by placating or neutralising the evil power that was causing it. A cure of insomnia would be seen as the removal of the "wakeful spirit" that was inducing it, and so on.

We have seen how some of the phenomena of our field look from the point of view of someone who believes in spirit possession. Now let us see how that paradigm looks from the perspective of our present systems approach.

The starting point is the idea that the mind is composed of many subsystems. At times, as in the case of split personalities, these different subsystems can be distinct and very complex, each having its own memory and pattern of behaviour. We will later meet other aspects of this phenomenon, which go by such names as dissociation, "the child within", "the hidden observer", etc.: all attest to the fact that for most of us the mind is best seen as a complex network of interacting systems, many of considerable complexity and often having a high degree of autonomy. In such cases they can function like sub-personalities.

There is really very little difference in practical terms between such a picture and that of spirit possession. Any differences centre around such essentially pragmatic questions as, "How do such subsystems arise in the mind or brain?" One school of thought will say that it can only be as a result of an elaboration of physical information which has come through the normal senses or is implicit in the genes. The school of thought at the other extreme will say that they can arise by some paranormal process: that a distinct spirit, unbounded by space and time, may enter the mind or brain and take root.

The systems paradigm cannot, of course, resolve this conflict: that can only come as a result of very careful examination of the phenomena. What it does do is to provide a comparatively neutral language and framework which could be shared by proponents of both views and which might lead to some agreed experiments to determine the actual facts. If, for example, we are examining a case of automatic writing, then it could be agreed by both sides that there is a subsystem of the person which is acting outside the scope of the normal personality. The content of the writing might then be examined to see if it is explicable on the basis of previous experience in this life, or not.

If, as another example, we are dealing with a case of "past-life regression", it could be agreed it involves a complex subsystem of the person which is functioning in some ways like that of a person who lived in the past. (There is nothing too strange about this in itself: actors can do it regularly.) It can be presumed that this subsystem would have some effects on the present behaviour of the person, and that any changes a therapist might make to the "past-life" system, including making it more conscious, would have some effect. Such changes are valid whatever the assumption made about the origin of the phenomenon. In principle, however, it might be possible for some criteria to be agreed which might clarify the question of the origin of such systems. A clear case in which a "past-life" report revealed a complete knowledge of the meaning of a written language which up until then had been totally obscure would, for example, be strong evidence for the transference of a mental system of thought by other than the ways we accept on a daily basis: i.e. primarily through what we have seen or heard - at first hand or perhaps on the TV, video, radio or in a book.

In brief then, IF it were to be established as a pragmatic fact that spirit possession in the traditional sense takes place, THEN we would simply include such systems and their workings within the current theoretical structure of systems. This is parallel to the observation that IF it were to be established that mental communication - telepathy - is possible between minds then this would not affect the framework of the theory, based as it is on the effect of one system on another: it would simply add an additional method by which one mental system can affect another - like the addition of radio or television.

2. Life-force effects.

Mesmer (1734-1815) is one of the best known names in the history of Hypnotism (Burranelli (1975)Bib). He can be taken to herald in a new paradigm. In this, the old idea of powerful spirits with wills, intelligences and feelings is displaced by a belief in powerful life-forces akin to gravity, magnetism and electricity. Mesmer was first influenced by Newton's theory of gravitation. To begin with he called the force animal magnetism, though he later came to regret the term since too many people then confused it with ordinary magnetism. This force could be stored in certain objects. He, other things and other people could be a channel for it. If its flow was blocked in a person, it could lead to illness. Healing resulted from restoring the proper flow.

Such ideas are congenial to certain kinds of human minds in certain ages, it would seem, since others independently arrived at similar theories, in which the force was given different names. A Baron von Reichenbach (1788-1869) claimed the discovery of what he called the Od force with similar properties. In America the so-called Electro-biology of Grimes (1839)Bib had the same flavour. In this century we find Reich with his orgone energy which could likewise be stored and used. And to the present day the concept of a life-force floats freely through New Age literature.

We also find notions of "psychic energy", "repressed (perhaps sexual) energy" and the like entering into some psychoanalytical writings and thought without a great deal of attempt to pin down the notions precisely, so that they are scarcely distinguishable from the other forces mentioned above.

I am not aware of a proponent of this way of thinking who has worked the ideas out in detail. There seems a certain nebulous vagueness about the supposed force which is mirrored in a similar vagueness of the thought about it. Thus Mesmer himself simultaneously saw the "magnetism" as being capable of passing through anything, but as being reflected from mirrors and also of being stored in certain things! In his list of 27 propositions concerning animal magnetism we find the following propositions (Mesmer (1779)Bib):

13. Experience shows a diffusion of matter so subtle that it penetrates all other bodies, apparently without any loss of potency.

15. It is like light in that it can be reinforced and reflected by mirrors.

17. ... (it) can be accumulated, concentrated, and transported from one place to another.

This is such a strange combination of properties that you would expect it to suggest all forms of questions in the mind, but it did not to Mesmer.

As an example of how this theoretical approach might treat a typical phenomenon, we may consider a fairly typical response of many of Mesmer's patients which was that at some stage in the proceedings they would go into some form of convulsion - a crisis. This is not something that happens in modern Hypnotherapy, but then it is not expected. If we were to suggest it, then undoubtedly there would be Subjects who would respond in that way. (Stage Hypnotists have been known to get people to respond as if they have just received a strong electrical shock.) But to the Mesmerist this was a clear manifestation of a release of the blocked energy.

As another example, I can say to someone: "Hold your hands six inches apart. I will now place mine one on either side of yours and a few inches away from them. You will then start to feel a powerful force coming from my hands forcing yours together." And when I do this it will normally work. If there is a belief in the existence of some vital force then this will seem to be very strong confirmation that I am producing that force.

However, all it really proves is the power of the idea and not the existence of the force, for it works equally well if I simply say (and, usually, repeat until it happens), "Hold your hand six inches apart. Try to keep them that distance apart. They will in fact, whatever you do, be drawn together." In neither case will any flow of energy be measurable from me to the Client. All I have done is to establish a system of thought in the person's mind.

Notice that a Practitioner like Mesmer would still be credited with some power, though it is not now the power of a possessing spirit, but some sort of power of his own to direct this life-force. It might be manifest in his eyes or in his hands. He might well have his effect by moving his hands over the patient's body, with or without touching it. The norm in the practice of Mesmerists seems to have been a great deal of contact, which was often very vigorous. There are certain "healers" in the present day who claim some form of this same power.

In the longer term the most valuable consequence of the shift of perspective that we may associate with Mesmer is that the phenomena came to be thought of as things that might be analysed in a controlled way. A big problem with the old spirit-world picture is that spirits are, of their nature, not easy to measure or control. Once the phenomena are assumed to be the result of something more like forces they are open to examination. And it must be said that when the notions of Mesmer were put to the test by the Royal Commission appointed in France to look into his claims, it was found that his claims for the existence of a force of "animal magnetism" were unsubstantiated. For example a patient who would react appropriately to a tree when he had seen it being "magnetised", reacted at random to trees if he had not seen which one had been treated. The Commission concluded that Mesmer's results were a result of the belief and expectation of people together with the fact that some spontaneous remissions are to be expected in any case (Rapport... (1784)Bib).

This report did not have very much effect on the continuing use of Mesmeric techniques which gradually changed in the hands of various people over the next half century from the end of the eighteenth century into the nineteenth. Over this period most of the common Hypnotic phenomena were being evoked regularly, and it would appear that the repertoire of travelling Mesmeric showmen of the day would be rather similar in content and tone to that of many a modern stage Hypnotist, though their "explanation" of what was happening would be different.

What are we to make of vital energy explanations?

To the best of my knowledge all properly conducted examinations of detailed predictions of this theory have led to essentially the same conclusion as that of the Royal Commission: there is no evidence for a transfer of energy or of there being any vital force or similar.

But from the perspective of our current systems approach we may perhaps build a bridge to such theories as follows. What we can certainly do is to activate in another person a new pattern of thought. This, in itself, is not a process which is essentially energetic. It has more to do with ordering, with changing the patterns of thought. But the new pattern of thought can lead to an increase, or of course a decrease, in the activity of a variety of subprocesses in the person. For example, if a person is shouted at, it can arouse strong feelings of anger or even actual violence. In such a case it can look as if the person has received energy from the shouter. But an even stronger response can be evoked by a piece of paper, such as an Income Tax demand, where there is negligible energy involved, only information.

So, we transfer patterns, order, information, and this may lead to an activation of energy out of all proportion to any minute amounts of energy that are actually involved in the sound waves or other media which convey the change. The amplification that this involves will be made the subject of Chapter 13.

3. Neurological theories

It is convenient to associate the start of this approach with the name of James Braid (1795-1860). In his book of 1842 he gave the world the results of what his rational Scottish mind had discovered about the Mesmeric phenomena of the day. He also gave us the word Hypnosis (Braid (1842)Bib).

The essence of his theoretical conception is that he discovered that he could greatly depress or prodigiously exalt (his terms) the arousal of selected parts of the nervous system. The name he chose to describe the phenomena was, in full, Neuro-Hypnosis, or a sleep of the nerves. This is a reference to the condition of greatly depressed activity of most groups of nerves in his Subjects. But he was quite clear that this was distinct from normal sleep, and that it could be combined with a greatly exalted condition of other groups of nerves.

In terms of the concepts that have been introduced in this book, Braid's idea was that the level of activity of particular subsystems of the nervous system could be increased or decreased freely and dramatically. In this respect his ideas are clear precursors of those in this book.

He also demonstrated that the standard phenomena of Mesmerism, which were supposedly a result of the power of animal magnetism, could be produced as readily with no passes, contact from the Practitioner, etc.

Braid, however, also thought in terms of a Hypnotic state. This is a natural conclusion from his experiences. He used one and only one induction procedure. He expected the one form of response. With our present understanding it is not surprising that he should therefore have discovered a seeming uniformity of response.

In the one hundred and fifty years since then, the notion of a unique Hypnotic state has continued to run through our subject. There have been many attempts in more recent years to find one single clear defining criterion for this supposed state which will effectively distinguish it from other states - but to no avail. And indeed, surely the a priori assumption is that a single state is far too simple a concept to explain the fact that the phenomena of Hypnosis can arise in conditions as different as the very relaxed calm office of a modern Hypnotherapist and the emotionally charged group sessions of Mesmer which were characterised by patients falling about in convulsions and having to be taken into adjacent rooms to recover from their crises?

Associated with the notion of a single state has been a more modern tendency to try to determine ONE neurological structure which is involved in Hypnosis. Some workers have been inclined to think that it depends on the inhibition of the activity of the left (verbal) hemisphere of the brain and a simultaneous activation of the right hemisphere (Shone (1983)Bib). Clearly such a process comes within the definition of Hypnosis used here in that the above lateralisation of brain activity is one particular example of the general principles of Hypnosis which involves a relative change in the activities of various systems. But there is no clear evidence that this particular change is either necessary or sufficient for the production of any other particular Hypnotic phenomenon.

A modern refinement of this theory maintains that the balance between the hemispheres can be altered by forced uninostril breathing: breathing through the right nostril tends to increase the activity of the left hemisphere and vice versa.

Another theory, which has also only been presented in a superficial way, is that the key system is the Ascending Reticular Activating System (RAS) in the brain stem (Waxman (1981)Bib). This is certainly involved in general levels of arousal or activity in the brain, and presumably any global changes in mental activity will involve the activity of the RAS. So while it is quite consistent with the general principles of Hypnosis that it should be possible to affect the activity of the RAS, there is again no evidence that changes to it are either necessary or sufficient for the production of a given phenomenon. We have already remarked on the fact that Hypnotic phenomena may be observed in Subjects with both very high and very low levels of arousal.

Closely related to this is the idea that Hypnosis involves simply a form of sleep, for there are certain key nuclei in the brain stem - the nuclei of Raphe - whose activation will either switch on sleep or switch on arousal. This idea, in one form or another, goes back a long way in the history of Hypnosis. The suggestion of sleep was used as least as far back as De Puységur (Tinterow (1970)Bib).

Now sleep may seem to be a simple thing or state, but more recent research has shown a number of things about it. The first thing is that it is not a state. Measurements of brain activity show a continuously changing pattern. Within this pattern there are episodes of dreaming in which there is clearly a lot of mental activity of a particular kind. In addition we may note that it is during sleep that the level of growth hormones in the brain is at its maximum, which strongly suggests that some processes are very active.

Having said this it is also clear that sleep is characterised by the almost total elimination of the activity of certain high-order brain functions: those we associate with consciousness. Thus it is within the bounds of the general principles of Hypnosis that it is possible to change the pattern of activity in similar ways to those in sleep - and indeed when suggestions of sleep have been given it has been found possible to measure electrical waves in the brain which are characteristic of sleep. But again we must emphasise that this has not been shown to be either necessary or sufficient in order to produce any other Hypnotic phenomenon.

Attempts have also been made to detect other specific changes in brain wave patterns which can be associated with a unique "state" of Hypnosis. Again the weakness of this approach is that an experimenter may well find it possible to record certain changed patterns of activity in the brain in certain Subjects, such as those mentioned above, since, as I have continually noted, the changing of the patterns of activity is the central theme of Hypnosis. But there is again a lack of evidence that any particular change is either necessary or sufficient for the production of any other Hypnotic phenomenon.

Another theory in this area, promoted by Rossi (1993)Bib, involves linking Hypnotic phenomena to the natural cycles of wakefulness and sleepiness during the day - the diurnal cycles. There are such cycles, which are a continuation of cycles which have been observed in sleep also, which have a period of roughly 90-120 minutes. Roughly speaking this means that the degree to which a person is more active and outward looking as opposed to being more passive and inward looking will fluctuate with time. Since quite a lot of Hypnotic phenomena involve a certain amount of inwardness it is reasonable to suppose that they could be evoked more easily at certain points on the cycle than others. However this is a far cry from establishing that this particular phenomenon is at the basis of all Hypnotic phenomena.

Another line of thought seems to go to the opposite extreme from the sleep theories, and to emphasise the strong focus of attention which can characterise mental activity in many Hypnotic procedures. It can be noted that at times the attention of the Subject can be narrowed so that there is no awareness of anything but the Hypnotist's voice and the current thought which it is generating. It is certainly true that this can happen, and that many Hypnotic procedures have this as a goal. Braid himself thought on these lines and at one time attempted to change his nomenclature and to drop the word Hypnosis in favour of mono-ideism, which is a reference to the single-mindedness characteristic of many Subjects. The narrowing of attention is often a very useful tool in the practice of Hypnosis, and we will come across it often, particularly when it is sharpened by the constant use of the question, "Exactly which systems is it being limited to?" At the same time it is a fact that other Hypnotic techniques and phenomena are aimed at broadening of attention and even to a seeming elimination of any focused attention at all, so that we could not define the subject entirely in terms of focused attention without losing valuable material. If we regard attention as an aspect of the functioning of the brain, then it is natural within the systems paradigm to see Hypnosis as involving the increase or decrease of attention to a particular area according to the needs of the task in hand.

Finally under this classification comes one of the simplest pictures of what Hypnosis involves. This picture sees the brain in terms of conscious plus subconscious. All functions of systems of the brain involved in conscious behaviour are lumped into one supposed entity, "the conscious mind", and all those others of which there is not normally conscious control or awareness are lumped into another, "the subconscious mind" (cf. Bowers et al. (1984)Bib). The process of Hypnosis is then seen as being the displacement of the conscious mind - it is "sent to sleep" - and the Hypnotist then speaks to the subconscious mind directly. This idea is not one that can be clearly associated with one person. It is implicit in the work of Puységur and subsequent workers in our field, and it is probably the case that it was the cumulative experience of those working with Hypnotic phenomena in the nineteenth century that led to the notion of the subconscious that nowadays is associated with Freud.

There are other versions of this model which go by the name of dissociational theories. Anyone who has read the literature on clear cases of split or multiple personalities will be familiar with the picture of one body which seems to contain a number of personalities which are at variance with each other. Despite the fact that such extreme cases seem to be very rare, they provide a simple picture which can be carried over into thinking of people who do not suffer from any problem.

The most recent proponent of a form of dissociational theory is Hilgard, an American psychologist who has done some excellent work on the use of Hypnosis in pain (Hilgard & Hilgard (1975)Bib ). Some of his experiments demonstrated that it would be possible for there to be no conscious awareness of pain in certain individuals, but there was clear evidence that it was being perceived at some level of the mind.

Such theories are quite in harmony with a systems approach, the only difference being the amount of detail. A systems approach will expect there to be a multitude of systems at many levels. Under some conditions the situation may simplify into effectively two systems, just as a society may at some times be seen for simplicity as a governing class and a governed. But this view of things will far more often be too naïve and simplistic to be of universal value. Things are seldom this clear cut. For example such a model of a nation has little to tell us about improving the educational system or the health system or the transportation system of a country. Similarly the fact that there is no conscious awareness of a system says very little about it: it may involve a "split personality" or a repressed memory, or simply an automatic action, or an automatic regulation of weight.

Finally in this section we may mention a common "definition" of the supposed "state of Hypnosis", i.e. as "an alternative state of consciousness". The main thrust of this definition is that Hypnosis does not involve the Subject becoming unconscious. It does not say what the difference is between a supposed "normal" state of consciousness - is this the "state" of being in a rage, or in a race, or watching a video or making love? - and the "alternative" state - is this relaxed, or doing the cancan on stage, or expressing deeply repressed emotions?

However, this idea can be expressed rather more precisely in terms of the systems approach as follows. Hypnosis will generally involve activating systems in a rather different pattern from those which are customary for the individual in order to achieve the required change. There will be no ONE different pattern for each person, but nevertheless the difference will be perceived by the individual, and during the process of experiencing this different pattern we might loosely say that he or she "has an altered consciousness".

It should be apparent by now that the theories mentioned in this section can be seen to have the following common pattern. 1. A phenomenon is observed in the course of some Hypnotic procedure. 2. It involves some particular system or function of the brain or nervous system - which we will call X. 3. An unwarranted generalisation is made that ALL Hypnotic phenomena are a result of X.

The argument of this book is that all such overgeneralisations are invalid. Each of the systems mentioned can, at certain times, be relevant to the practice of Hypnosis, but none can be seen as central. Of the theories mentioned above in this section Braid's is perhaps the least limited in that it comes quite close to the perception of the multiplicity of effects which can be achieved, though of course he did not know nearly as much as we do today about the workings of the very many complex systems in the human body and nervous system.

4. Suggestion.

The fourth major approach to Hypnosis is based on the simple idea that all the phenomena are a simple result of suggestion. We may associate this idea with Bernheim (1840-1919) (Bernheim (1884)Bib).

We may present the argument for this approach in the following way. It is a commonplace fact that we generally act in accordance with our beliefs. If, then, these beliefs can somehow be changed, our behaviour will change. In this view Hypnotic phenomena are simply a result of changing beliefs.

Inasmuch as any thought is a mental process, the initiation of a new belief involves the activation of a particular new and specific process in the brain. Likewise, since the acceptance of a new belief will often mean the rejection of an old one, it will also be necessary to inhibit or reduce the activity of a second system of thought. Therefore the process of suggestion comes within the framework of Hypnosis we are developing in this book.

By approaching things in this way we can avoid futile discussion about a supposed difference between simple suggestion and Hypnosis. Even Bernheim found that he could produce dramatic changes in people's behaviour by simple suggestion with no "Hypnotic" induction at all. He found, for example, some individuals who, if charged confidently with a theft of which they were totally innocent, acted in every detail as if they were guilty - even to seemingly recalling the details of the incident. Is it any wonder then that a stage Hypnotist can find individuals who can believe with total conviction the innocuous, if unlikely, things he suggests to them?

Proper experiments have, in fact, failed to produce evidence of any incontrovertible difference between "simple" suggestion and "Hypnotic" suggestion. The search for such a difference is largely motivated, consciously or unconsciously, by the concept of a unique Hypnotic state.

The limitations of a theory based entirely on the idea of suggestion are that 1) it omits any details of how the suggestions lead to the desired results, and consequently 2) it cannot explain why some suggestions are effective and some not. Finally 3) it does not answer the question of what suggestions should be made other than the simple, "The problem will go".

By contrast the systems approach, as will become clearer in later chapters, is in a position to determine a causal chain by which a suggested idea will lead to changes in other systems, which will in turn lead to further changes, until we reach the system of interest. It can indicate better what changes should be suggested, and in which systems; it can also discriminate between cases in which direct suggestion can be expected to be effective and those in which it cannot.

5. Sociological.

At the opposite extreme from Braid, who saw the phenomena as being essentially intrinsic to the Subject, we find theories which are based on looking at the combined system of Subject plus Hypnotist.

There are those such as Ferenczi (1916)Bib who see what happens as being essentially that the relationship of the two individuals becomes that of parent and child. The Hypnotist adopts the parental role and the Subject acts like an obedient and unquestioning child.

It is certainly possible for this sort of thing to happen. Given suitable cues it is relatively easy to evoke a pattern of behaviour which was current at an earlier time. The standard Hypnotic phenomenon of regression to an earlier age is a particular form of this. In the language of systems we may say that it is certainly possible for a childlike behavioural system to be evoked in a Subject, and that for the Hypnotist to adopt a suitable parental role is one way of achieving this.

So it is helpful to see certain aspects of Hypnosis in this light. What would be misleading, however, would be to see the whole of the subject from this angle, since there is no evidence that it is either necessary or sufficient for a Subject to enter into such a childlike relationship with the Hypnotist in order to evoke any other Hypnotic phenomenon.

Another common relationship which has been used as a model for the Hypnotist-Client system is that of sexual love. Freud seems to have thought on these lines for a while. It is true that if a person falls in love with another, then she or he is at that time very open to the influence of the beloved. Consequently if feelings of romantic love for the Hypnotherapist were to arise in a Client, then an increase in responsiveness would be likely: possibly this does arise in certain cases. But this phenomenon is again really too limited to be a suitable foundation on which to erect a theory of our subject. It would make self-hypnosis very hard to explain and would lead to the expectation that Hypnotic phenomena would arise only, or at the least far more easily, between members of opposite sexes than of the same sex - an expectation which is not substantiated by any evidence I have come across.

There is a third significant social phenomenon which has not, I believe, been used explicitly as a foundation for a major theory, though it might have been, and which is included here for comparison and completeness. This is that of the implicit obedience of an inferior to a superior in either the armed forces or any other strongly hierarchical part of society. It is certainly the case that in the earlier days of this century books on Hypnosis would say that members of the armed forces made good subjects. The presumption is that they were so accustomed to obeying orders without question that it was easy for the Hypnotist to build on this basis an unquestioning acceptance of his suggestions. We may surmise that some of the easy success of early practitioners such as Mesmer and Braid may have been based on the fact that many of their patients would have been used to accepting what their social superiors said without any question in a way which is far from common today. Insofar as the Hypnotist was of a higher class, it would have been comparatively easy for him to obtain many Hypnotic phenomena which depend on a simple and unquestioning acceptance of the Hypnotist's statements.

A fourth social phenomenon (related to the above but without the hierarchical overtones), which has been used as the basis for an explanation of Hypnotic phenomena, is that of social compliance. This idea is usually associated with the name of Spanos (1986)Bib. In essence this theory views Hypnotic phenomena as being the acting out of a role by the Subject which will meet the expectations of the situation. The situation includes the Hypnotist, but also any other people involved and the physical situation. Thus the situation in a consulting room is different from that on a stage. In the latter situation the Subject will have an expectation that dancing the rumba is only to be expected. In the former it would not be. Consequently it would be much harder to elicit such dancing in the consulting room. More generally there are certain expectations of what Hypnosis involves which are diffused through society and which change over time. An example is the expectation of a "crisis" - a going into convulsions - which Mesmer's patients did frequently because it was expected and which does not happen today because it is not.

It is certainly true that people will do quite extraordinary things as a result of social compliance, as numbers of psychological experiments have proved (Milgram (1974) Bib). People will change their behaviour or ideas in response to the social situation that they are in, though of course this is not the same as saying that all people will do so equally. It must therefore be regarded as one of the mechanisms involved in certain Hypnotic phenomena. However this again seems far too limited a basis to explain all the phenomena of Hypnosis.

Perhaps we may put all the social theories into perspective by considering a hypothetical intelligent race which has no pair bonding, no nurturing, no hierarchies and no social groupings. Some form of intelligent reptile comes to mind. Would any form of Hypnosis be possible in such a species? A proponent of each of the above theories should say, "No. Since the particular form of interaction I am assuming as the whole basis of Hypnosis is not present, nothing can be done." Yet there is every reason to suppose that if you carefully manipulated the creature's imagination, you could produce many of the responses we regard as Hypnotic. Many such phenomena are produced in humans purely in response to pictures in the imagination. If, let us suppose, we were to give such a creature a journey into a virtual reality world which we control, then by manipulating the world appropriately we could manipulate its thoughts and feelings and actions. By creating pictures of the world as it was when it emerged from its shell, it would seem that we would have a good chance of activating childlike behaviour patterns, i.e. regression. If we wanted to stop it smoking, we should be able to do some simple conditioning involving introducing some painful/fearful images with every introduction of the image of a cigarette, and so on. Practising Hypnotherapists will see that this hypothetical scheme reproduces much of what they do without the need for any common language, or any social compliance factor at all. So in principl