hypnosis and martial arts

[packard]

I have been playing with many ideas over my martial arts training that have included NLP and self hypnosis.

I came across a site that does a hypnosis Mp3 download to improve your martial arts training. www.hypnosisdirect.com

has anyone had any experince of this site or indeed hypnosis and thier training.

Just wondered from several perpspectives, from motivation to actual improving technique.

regards,

P

[stimulant]

I tried hypnosis to improve my martial arts one, but all it did was bring back repressed alien abduction memories....

[shaolinboxer]

I know one instuctor who throws people by what I would call a kind of hypnosis. Her confidence and age lull you into thinking she is a "master" and you should fall for her.

[David Jamieson]

I went to an amazing reveen show once. He couldn't hypnotize me so i had to get off the stage.

anyway, hypnosis is something that can be used, or not, I wouldn't put it up there with must have components to martial arts.

Jedi mind tricks don't work on the real bad asses. :p

[Vasquez]

hypnosis works by changing what you believe is possible. the impossible becomes possible

[David Jamieson]

hypnosis works by changing what you believe is possible. the impossible becomes possible


not true. For instance, you cannot have someone do something they wouldn't normally be willing to do while in a state of hypnosis.

The impossible shall forever remain the impossible by merit of it's impossibility. IE: we cannot fly without contraptions that allow us to do so, we can't breath underwater, we can't stop bullets with chi, and so on. These are impossibilities that can not be overcome by sheer thought and will.

better to study physics. the return on your investment will be much greater. :p

[HearWa]

not true. For instance, you cannot have someone do something they wouldn't normally be willing to do while in a state of hypnosis.
That's wrong. Hypnosis was invented as a way of controlling a person even beyond their own will. In hypnosis, you surpass your subjects conscious mind and command his or her sub-conscious mind. In a way your conscious layer almost becomes your subjects conscious layer.

You might be thinking of Sophrology, however. It's often regarded as a "safer hypnosis" since the subject is still conscious during the session.


The impossible shall forever remain the impossible by merit of it's impossibility. IE: we cannot fly without contraptions that allow us to do so, we can't breath underwater, we can't stop bullets with chi, and so on. These are impossibilities that can not be overcome by sheer thought and will.
Ok.


better to study physics. the return on your investment will be much greater. :p
But what if you believe you cannot do physics? This is where hypnosis and sophrology really shines.

[Vasquez]

yes we can, the mind can overcome matter. matter doesn't matter when you have good mind control thats what sifu says.

[David Jamieson]

That's wrong. Hypnosis was invented as a way of controlling a person even beyond their own will. In hypnosis, you surpass your subjects conscious mind and command his or her sub-conscious mind. In a way your conscious layer almost becomes your subjects conscious layer.

You might be thinking of Sophrology, however. It's often regarded as a "safer hypnosis" since the subject is still conscious during the session.


Ok.


But what if you believe you cannot do physics? This is where hypnosis and sophrology really shines.

You cannot control someone who is not willing to do what you want them to do. At least not through hypnosis. Gun to the head and/or kidnapping of family members has always proven to be more effective that way. :p

I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree that hypnosis has any legitimacy in respect to mind control beyond the will of the subject.

Kinda like levitation. :p no one can prove that either but it can be disproven and shown to be fraudulent time and again. Hypnosis doesn't get a lot of clout in psychology either. It is used to relax people and to help them become less inhibited and to open up, but you still can't make them do what they wouldn't be willing to do in the first place.

and so, I disagree with the manchurian candidate hypothesis on the matter.

[packard]

interesting points.

although I was more thinking along the lines of improving your physical techniques or motivation to get better in a certain area of training rather than any chi argument.

P

[PangQuan]

I think you could deffinately improve motivation through hypnosis. you already want to, you just dont feel you have the drive to act on your desire, a little push down the stairs can get things rolling.

I remember reading an account of of: The Holographic Universe, by Michael Talbot.

He was at a friend's birthday party. They had hired a well known hypnotist to be the entertainment. One of the tricks the hypnotist performed was very interesting. The person being hypnotised was the birthday guys daughter. She was placed in a chair, and hypnotised to not be able to see her father. The father being placed right in front of her was in between her and the hypnotist. They hypnotist then took off his watch and placed it in the small of her fathers back. When asked to describe the item he held, she was able to do so with descriptive accuracy.

The question remains; did the daughter and hypnotist set up the father, or is the mind truly more powerfull than we think? Many of our "scientific facts" are constantly evolving, changing, or being dis proven. How much do we actually KNOW about our universe and reality?

[TenTigers]

so according to this last post, you can hypnotize me to see through women's clothing? Neat!

[PangQuan]

lol, essentially yes.

if only i could learn how, i would open up shop. think the state would restrict my practices?

[Vasquez]

We see what we choose to see. That's why if you believe in chi it exist and works for you. can let you do things that physics would disallow. this is because you're not operating under the same physical laws anymore.

[David Jamieson]

we all operate under the same physical laws. Don't believe me? Have yourself hypnotized into believing bullets can't hurt you, then have someone shoot you. Maybe in the foot to match the other side. :p (read more on the boxer rebellion maybe?)

the party trick is just that, a party trick. Magicians often use accomplices, twins, informants and setups to get the game into gear. That's the nature of that business.

Magicians still astound people despite the fact that the audience willingly suspends their own disbelief.

The bigger question for me is why do people do this? Could it be that their ****genized boring same day in and day out lives demand that there be something different? something magical? as opposed to the often harsh realities of life that are really what is there? I can travel from Eastern Canada to the western United states without seeing any real differences in people, or cultural icons, theres macdonalds and walmarts dotting the landscape, people are wearing the same clothes here as there, we use the same technologies, eat the same foods and watch the same tv shows and listen to teh same songs on the radio. Enough of this and you will yearn for something mystical. Sadly, it is not there but your yearning for it will not cease. Be happy in knowing that it will not always be so.

[drunkenminkey]

I took a look at http://hypnosisdirect.com http://hypnosisdirect.com (http://hypnosisdirect.com) and I figured for $8.95 I'd give it a go. I've just listened to the download and it's quite good. I've never been hypnotised before and I am going to listen to it again without following the instructions, because I was so relaxed I went to sleep. Well, I guess that's the idea! - But the concept seems very positive and I think it might well help some people out. I've going to give it to some of my students to listen to, see what they make of it.

I was going to ask them for a refund under their money back guarantee, but I've decided to let them keep the $8.95... I felt a bit mean after copying it to CD for my students!

The file is about 6mb, otherwise I'd post it. Yeah Yeah, I know. I shouldn't copy stuff, but what can I say? I'm a bad person ;)

Drunken Minkey.

[packard]

I download a session last night as well.

I was quite surprised by it actually. Overall it was a good session, very relaxing and I did feel like i was in a good place to have suggestions planted in me.

I will wait and see how I feel next week. I think I might listen to it a few more times.

P

[Vasquez]

Yes I try to get hypnotised on a regular basis.

[packard]

so it has been a week or so since my last post and downloading the hypnosis session.

I do actually feel really good about my training.

Been very focussed on my conditioning and overall feel sharper!!

Good stuff!!!

P

[SimonM]

hypnosis works by changing what you believe is possible. the impossible becomes possible

Not at all the case. Hypnosis mainly works through self-suggestion. A person has certain expectations about how they will behave when hypnotised ie: their inhibitions will be lowered and they will enter into a state of hightened suggestability. The hypnotist does their schtick and (Lo and Behold) the subject demonstrates lowered inhibitions and an increased level of suggestibility. Which is why it completely fails on stubborn *******s like David and I.

I've NEVER been successfully hypnotised. And I don't bother going to hypnotist shows because they are nothing more than a chance to watch my peers act like drunken *******es only without all the tasty tasty alcohol.

[SimonM]

We see what we choose to see. That's why if you believe in chi it exist and works for you. can let you do things that physics would disallow. this is because you're not operating under the same physical laws anymore.


Vasquez:

I am what is known as an occult scholar. I've actually sat down and studied all this stuff dispassionately. Magic, Ghosts, Qi, Demons, all that stuff. You know what?

9/10 of it can be explained by perfectly rational phenomena. The "white noise" bollox for instance really IS just random noise. But if enough people spend enough time listening to enough random noise their brain will insert patterns into it. When they then DESCRIBE the pattern to others it sets up others to believe they are hearing the same thing. Basically it's 1000000 monkeys banging away to create Shakespeare. Qi is definately in this category (the category of the rationally explainable, not the monkies). It's not that I discount the ability of a skilled individual to perform unusual feats (such as hucking a sewing needle through a pane of glass say) I just don't think we need to put it down to a magical and mysterious force when rigorous muscle control and an elementary knowlege of physics will do the trick.

If you are interested in exploring the mystery of the world (and there is lots of mystery out there) the first thing you need is reason and the second thing you need is a healthy dose of scepticism or else you will fall for every huckster from Barnum to Crowley.

[PangQuan]

Packard.

I downloaded the MA session on that site. I listened to it once, last night.

All I know is that I woke up later on the floor (was lying on floor to listen to it)

So I dont know if I fell asleep or if I was hypnotized...

Ill try it again though.

[johnyk]

I asked someone to Hypnotize me once. It made me train like crazy with great skill increase. But I did not feel the tiredness. I think it's because I was "programmed" to finish my work outs no matter what.
Soon I got hurt.
If you going to use it, make sure you have qualified, knowledgeble supervision. Or you can get hurt.

[Vasquez]

SimonM

Since you'bve studied all that what is the difference between ghost and demons?

[SimonM]

Well regardless of the dubious nature of either, phenomena related to "ghosts" and phenomena related to "demons" share several characteristics.

First is the characteristic of poltergeist activity. Both "haunted" houses and locales subject to "demonic" activity tend to demonstrate things such as spontaneous door closings, etc.

Cold spots are also a common physical manifestation associated with both.

Many people suggest that "white noise" phenomena vary greatly between ghosts and demons. As I am sceptical as to the veracity of any "white noise" incedent I tend to discount this.

Now on to specifics of differences.

"Ghosts" are categorized as having a human origin. Most researchers believe that they are either "souls" that have remained attached to the material sphere (in the case of spiritually motivated researchers) or are the emotional residue left over by people (in the opinion of those who wish to appear more scientific).

As a caviat, paranormal investigation is entirely pseudo-scientific and so those who use scientific appearing terminology and methodology can be classed similarly to spiritualists. The existence or non-existence of ghosts under either paradigm remains entirely un-proven.

Phenomena specific to ghosts includes three types of visual element that can be recorded on film. These three elements are orbs, vortices and mists. Mists are usually described as differing from ordinary mist because they don't appear to correspond to humidity and are not water condensation, simply fogginess. They are easily faked. Also certain errors in the darkroom can cause accidental appearance of "mist" in still photographs that has nothing to do with ghost phenomena. However for those who wish to convince themselves that they have a haunted home..... :)

Orbs are basically light circles. Also easily enough faked, especially in still photography. Orbs appear to be associated with plasma discharge in some way however since they remain nothing more than un-explained visual phenomena this is entirely speculative.

Vortices (sing. Vortex) are chains of orbs following a cohesive path at relatively high speeds. Again it's easy to fake. I saw once a photograph, on a website dedicated to Ghost studies, that had been sent as an image of a vortex. It turned out to be the nylon strap to the camera the image was recorded with. It got in the shot without the photographer realizing.

"Demon" activity rarely includes these phenomena.

Now the issue of demons is more complex. I have no desire to write a book here and really, on this issue, I could. The most important differentiating factor between "Demon" and "Ghost" is that of origin. Demons are purported to have a non-human origin.

Again common phenomena in demon cases includes poltergeist activity, cold spots, and unusual :p messages :p in white-noise in the background of tape recorders.

There have also been scattered reports of posessions including a relatively recent audio recording from Russia that may be compelling IF it is not a complete forgery. I haven't acquired enough information on it at this time to make a decision though I am moved to think it is probably a forgery. Posession is generally more commonly reported in conjunction to Demon activity than it is with Ghost activity. Of course most recent scholarly research looks at posession as being nothing more than a form of self-hypnosis. Like hypnosis a person displays unusual, sometimes antisocial, behaivour and is able to shield themselves from correspondent derision by their peers and psychic damage (not telepathy, the REAL use of the bloody word) by inventing a situation in their own mind where they were under an external locus of control.

Other than that the phrase "Demon" goes back to Greece where they were seen simply as spirits. The phrase Demon originally did not imply malevolence however it has assumed that connotation since the middle ages.

Starting around 1200 AD certain scholars in the Christian and Jewish community turned to the study of Demons derived from old-testament references to King Solomon. According to this line of thought the devils of hell (which became associated with any non-angelic spirit under a Christian paradigm, thus Demons) were bound into servitude of the good as punishment for their transgressions. An archangel (I forget which one but I think it was either Michael or Gabriel) appeared to Solomon and instructed him on how he could purify himself to summon an angel to interceed on his behalf and round up Demons for him to enslave. These devils were then used to construct a very large church, thus serving "good". The medaeval theurgists attempted to recreate Solomon's magic. The text with the best provenance in this category is known as "the Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage". The extant copy (at the turn of the century, who knows it's fate after two world wars) was writen in an archaic dialect of French and was stored in a library in Paris. It was studied there by S. L. "MacGregor" Mathers who translated the text into English. However this copy was its self a copy of an edition, supposedly writen in German, penned by a figure known as Abraham the Jew who, according to his autobiography, was active in politics in Austria during the middle ages. If Abraham's manuscript still exists I am unaware of it's whereabouts. Mathers also believed the Paris copy to be the oldest available MS. Abraham claimed that his copy was in turn a translation of a document he recieved from a wizard named Abramelin who he encountered in Egypt. It is highly dubious that this figure ever existed however, assuming for a second that he did, he would have probably writen the MS in hebrew. This would have made it very close to the original Solomanic text (again assuming that such a thing ever existed, the medaevals were convinced that it did but that means little). It does provide a more convincing provenance than the Goetia or the Greater Key of Solomon (other texts of Solomonic magic) but that simply goes to demonstrate how unlikely these texts are to be of anything other than a forged nature.

Attempts at Solomonic magic continued into the Renaissance with a famous example being James Dee and Edward Kelly. This pair of Brits claimed to have discovered the language of the Angels (which Dee called Enochian) however Kelly was a known fraud artist and many people suspect that Dee was involved in Queen Elizabeth the First's extensive spy network. It has been suggested that Enochian was nothing more than a rather artful cypher.

However the Renaissance saw a significant shift in perception regarding the nature of "demons" and the risk involved in trafficing with them. This is the period of the witch trials. During this time it was a common accusation that witches consorted with demons and that witches caused an inocent person to become posessed by a demon.

This was the beginning of the popular conception of Demon as posessor.

The age of reason wound down the witch trials and other than a last-gasp in the Americas it was mostly over by the early 1700s. Many people decided that Demons did not exist at all and that, in fact, mental illness was truly what Demons were. Names like "Belial" were replaced with names like "Hysteria".
It's interesting to note that Mesmer's famous experiments were contemporaneous with the later part of this transition period.

However in those communities where the concept of "demon" was still given any credence it was the image not of the ambiguous spirit or the cringing slave that remained but rather that of the malevolent posessor. This has continued in pop-culture to this day. Movies like the Exorcist continue to shape popular conceptions of what "demons" are.

Are there spiritual entities? I don't know.
Are some of them of a non-human origin? I don't know.
Are they malevolent? I don't know.
Do they posess people? I don't know.
Can they be enslaved by people? I don't know.
Is there solid proof of their existence or of the veracity of the phenomena they cause? No, there is not.

Tell me is this a suffient answer Vasquez? Any longer and I'm going to need to start talking to publishers. :p

[PangQuan]

LOL, your funny vasquez

[SimonM]

Do you think he will bother reading all that now that I went to the trouble of typing it? I mean he did ask. I really did study this ****. A lot of this comes from a course I did in my second year of University (the section of the renaissance and the age of reason specifically) called "the metaphysics and epistimology of witchcraft". We had to read a few chapters of the Malleus. That was not fun I tell you. But it was fun flirting with the witchy girls who took that class. :D

[SimonM]

Hey! I killed the thread! ;) :D

[Vasquez]

SimonM,

That's a good answer. Seems that neither ghost nor demons have been proven let alone which is human and which is non-human in origin. Also even if something gives the same effect the causes can be enitrely different. eg. fire is hot and so is the sun - but there is no fire in the sun.

How do you explain poltergise or other recordings other than film. You talked about fakery / accidents in photography.

[SimonM]

Some poltergeist activity is obviously hoax. A guy standing behind a door, props on fishing line, etc. Some seems honestly anomalous. This is actually amoung the most compelling evidence of unexplained activity of some nature. Exactly what remains to be seen and is currently entirely in the realm of the speculative.

As for photographic fakery here are a few examples:

If you are using black and white negatives accidental exposure of the paper to small quantities of white light may cause some fogging on the final print after it's developed.

If you are using old emulsion to develop your film and do not agitate it sufficiently a similar result can occur on the negative.

Digital photo editing suites allow for a host of effects but even without them a slightly-transluscent dot of blue marker on a negative (a VERY SMALL dot) can make for a relatively realistic looking orb.

A nylon strap such as those used for many camera staps may look black but is actually highly reflective. Placing one of those across the field of view and then using a flash can mimmic (accidentally or on purpose) a vortex.

As I said. Whenever looking into unexplained phenomena scepticism should be your first line of defense. Occams razor holds very much true.

[Vasquez]

What about those oiji boards, the thing moved by itself i swear no one pushed it. it just moved.

[SimonM]

:rolleyes:

Unconsciously one or more of the people in the group will have given the shuttle a nudge. Otherwise the shuttle would move around with nobody touching it at all. I somehow doubt you have seen that. If you have take a video and send it to the ghost hunters or some similar group.

[Vasquez]

I haven't seen it move without ppl touching it. But I have seen the candles go off and we were told to stay within the circle.

[TenTigers]

vas-you don't have to stay within the circle. Spiritual entities cannot affect you. You are more powerful than them. Next time, try going outside the circle, and see how weak they actually are. They are more scared of you than you are of them.

[Christopher M]

That's wrong. Hypnosis was invented as a way of controlling a person even beyond their own will.

That's wrong. Hypnosis was invented as a treatment for hysteria, using cathartic and suggestive methods.


you cannot have someone do something they wouldn't normally be willing to do while in a state of hypnosis.

Sort of. But you can have someone do something they wouldn't be able to normally do, as in the case of hypnotic anaesthesia.

[Christopher M]

The phrase Demon originally did not imply malevolence however it has assumed that connotation since the middle ages.

You're right to point out the etymology of 'demon' from the Greek 'daimon,' but this shouldn't be taken to suggest that demonology has such a late origin. As you note, there are clear examples of demonology in the Old Testament -- and I would add, also in the New Testament. The Judeo-Christian tradition inherited, from Zoroastrianism and related religions, demonology of even older roots; the clear influence of which on turn-of-the-era Greek culture is evident in, for example, the Chaldaean Oracles.


The text with the best provenance in this category <of Solomonic magic> is known as "the Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage".

I would point to Agrippa's Three Books of Occult Philosophy (and the various versions of Solomon's keys which you do mention) as the more classic source of medieval magic (which would also clarify the tradition's relation, in medieval Europe, to medicine and alchemy). The Abramelin text is something of an oddity, whereas there is a pretty clear relation between Agrippa and the multitude which followed.


However in those communities where the concept of "demon" was still given any credence it was the image not of the ambiguous spirit or the cringing slave that remained but rather that of the malevolent posessor.

I don't think "cringing slave" is an accurate conceptualization of the medieval understanding of a demon -- there are, for example, some fairly chilling warnings in the Abramelin text and some related literature. The attitude of medieval demonology speaks more, I think, to the high regard the demonologist had for himself, rather than a low regard given to demons. The theurgic method seems to have been derived largely from Gnostic roots, which conceptualized the planetary or astral powers as manifesting unwanted deterministic effects upon people (as derivatives of the Demiurge), which could be removed by sequentially facing and defeating them through ritual invocation. The process in the Abramelin text directly mirrors this progression, though it uses Judeo-Christian terms for the entities involved.

(Ok, I admit it, I'm only commenting out of sheer amusement to see this topic addressed here.)

[SimonM]

How could I have forgotten Agrippa! You are correct in that there is a good provenance for the Agrippa texts. Hell we know who wrote them and that the guy probably was a real person... that is better than most.

I still say that I trust the textual (non-content) veracity of the Abramelin text to that of other books such as the Goetia and the Greater Key.


I don't think "cringing slave" is an accurate conceptualization of the medieval understanding of a demon -- there are, for example, some fairly chilling warnings in the Abramelin text and some related literature.

I do understand, the medaeval conceptualization of Demons had them being very strong. That is why a theurgist could call them to perform such unlikely feats. However you must remember that all these texts do state on no uncertain terms to act through the intercession of a HGA. These angels were seen as being so much more powerful than all but the princes of the Demons that a good man could rule them - as a cringing slave - now if a person tried to call up Demons without the intervention of the HGA than matters changed. :D

And I agree Christopher, this thread is fun.

[Vasquez]

The probem with calling on demons is that there is usually a price to pay. If not done correctly they can also possess you.