DWQA Questions › Tag: mainstream science
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
The word “somnambulist” is the label for sleepwalkers. Erickson and other hypnotists use the word to also describe a person who enters a trance state from which they emerge with full amnesia (a total forgetting) of the trance, and everything that occurred during it, just like sleepwalkers when they awaken. Can Creator share with us what’s behind sleepwalking and why it affects some people but not others?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
218 views0 answers0 votes
Some people even go into a somnambulistic trance when driving and report that hours can pass by without their conscious awareness or any recollection of the drive itself. Yet they safely reach their destination, as if by “magic.” The other day, Brian was driving his daughter home and engaged in a conversation with her. Suddenly he found himself on a familiar street going in a direction away from his destination. Brian realized he had no recollection of making the necessary right-hand turn to get on that street. He had a full amnesia of it. This was the first time in his entire life, that he vividly experienced this phenomenon with full recognition of the implications. Was this orchestrated to happen? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
207 views0 answers0 votes
It appears the conscious or “awake” mind can focus on only one task at a time. For instance, the conscious mind cannot read a book and do a counting exercise at the same time. Yet when hypnotized to the somnambulistic level (the level that results in amnesia upon awakening), this ability to multitask has been readily demonstrated. Can Creator explain why this is so, and what levels of the mind are participating?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
196 views0 answers0 votes
Erickson treated a couple of patients with an affective (wholly psychological) writing disorder. Neither could write but could do any number of other complex hand tasks like using tools or knitting. He was unable to treat one of the patients, but with the other, he used hypnosis to “transfer” the handicap to the other non writing hand. This finally enabled this patient to resume writing successfully, but with the effect that the other hand would go numb, every time they went to write something. So while this is difficult to label a “healing,” it is a creative workaround to the problem and was a great help to the patient. What was really happening here, why was Erickson successful with one, but not the other patient, and what is truly needed to heal such disorders?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
198 views0 answers0 votes
Erickson mentioned a little-known phenomenon to folks who don’t work in extremely loud industrial settings. For old-timers in these settings, it is not uncommon for two acclimated workers to be able to carry on a “normal” conversation, at normal volume levels, when outsiders can’t hear each other even when shouting in close proximity. How is this even possible? This appears to be a phenomenon almost akin to telepathy. It certainly seems to defy our understanding of hearing biology. What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
219 views0 answers0 votes
One reason that science appears to eschew hypnosis is because the phenomenon is not 100% reproducible on demand. There is no such thing as a hypnotic induction technique that will work with every subject, every time. Erickson found that even with well-experienced subjects, he would sometimes have to alter his induction approach because they had developed what he called a ‘mind-set’ or intimate awareness of it, such that it was no longer effective. This was especially a problem with highly intelligent subjects. Ordinary science appears to have no patience for any of this. It appears to be more “art” than “science.” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
206 views0 answers0 votes
Erickson never believed that some people cannot be hypnotized, and spent his life attempting to prove that. One student, in particular, required over 300 one-hour working sessions before he could develop a somnambulistic trance. Once that was achieved, he turned out to be an outstanding subject. Erickson also noted that most engineers are difficult to hypnotize. Something peculiar about engineers seems to make them exceedingly impatient with anyone even attempting to hypnotize them. The result was that during many of his studies, it was always the engineers that would quit on him, often en masse. What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
257 views0 answers0 votes
Karl began his healing career as a hypnotist. And it was certainly the mixed results he got with it that helped motivate him to explore subconscious healing beyond hypnosis—eventually resulting in the revelations of Empowered Prayer and The Lightworker Healing Protocol. Can Creator share with us the importance of that journey and its achievements?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
244 views0 answers0 votes
This line of questioning resulted from encountering the following statement when studying the collective papers of Dr. Milton H. Erickson. Erickson is a man many consider to be the Einstein of hypnosis and hypnotherapy. In the forward Dr. Lawrence Kubie wrote: “One of the strange things about the study of hypnotic phenomena is that so many investigators drop out along the way. Behavioral scientists may work in this field for varying periods only to turn away to other things. This phenomenon is one of the reasons why the field of hypnotism tends repeatedly to drift into the hands of enthusiastic but unscientific amateurs, or into hands of those who exploit it for entertainment.” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
201 views0 answers0 votes
When Dr. Milton H. Erickson was an undergraduate student at the University of Wisconsin, he participated in a series of seminars exploring hypnotic phenomena. Erickson, even as a student, was in disagreement with his professor sponsoring the seminars. Erickson thought hypnotic phenomena had little dependence on the hypnotist, and crafted experiments to demonstrate this assumption. The experiments were wildly successful, beyond Erickson’s expectations. Erickson wrote: “The entire sequence of events was disturbing and obviously displeasing to my professor, since he felt that the importance of suggestions and suggestibility and the role of the operator (the hypnotist) in trance induction were being ignored and by-passed, with the result that this approach to a study of hypnosis was then abandoned in the university seminars.” Can Creator elaborate on why his professor was so “disturbed?”
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
171 views0 answers0 votes
Milton Erickson’s mentor eventually left the University of Wisconsin for Yale University. This is from Wikipedia: “After moving to Yale, his work in hypnosis quickly encountered resistance. The medical school’s concern over the dangers of hypnosis caused him to discontinue his research.” This seems like karmic payback, in at least some capacity, for the professor doing the same thing to his student, Erickson, years earlier. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
166 views0 answers0 votes
Why does the collective medical establishment consider hypnosis dangerous and taboo? Their aversion to it appears to go beyond a mere belief in its ineffectiveness. What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
198 views0 answers0 votes
When Brian was an undergraduate at a Big 10 university he took a series of courses with one of the most respected academic sociologists on campus. Their initial rapport was terrific. It even led to the student being invited to his professor’s lakeside cabin for a weekend. It was clear that the professor believed he had found an exciting young protege he could foster and mentor. When the student one day during an office visit mentioned his interest in paranormal topics, his professor “lost it.” In just a single moment, their protege-mentor relationship was OVER, and his professor became cold, distant, and unapproachable after that. Can Creator shed some light on what happened there?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
184 views0 answers0 votes
Brian took two courses in Russian History and wanted to do a paper on Stalin that focused on his psychology and upbringing. The professor was enamored of the deterministic model of history and believed history makes men, men don’t make history. So if not Stalin, a virtual clone of Stalin would have been created by events, and not responsible for the events, and the individual actor was irrelevant. Nevertheless, the professor suggested books by other historians he disagreed with, which the student eagerly pursued. He got an A-minus for his efforts, and his professor was candid in admitting the paper was graded down solely because the professor personally disagreed with the academics the student cited in his paper. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
229 views0 answers0 votes
We can cite examples of university professors who reportedly gave up greater academic freedom in exchange for being at a more highly prestigious institution. And examples of professors who left an ivy-league institution to join a school with less prestige, in order to have greater academic freedom to pursue the unconventional. That all seems incongruous. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • 
181 views0 answers0 votes
« Previous1…1112131415…24Next »