|
|
||
 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
Some Important Issues in Philosophy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 2 by Celestine N. Bittle, O.F.M.Cap.
Physiological and Sensory Phenomena The Muscular System. The voluntary muscles are affected by suggestion. The operator, through suggestion, can produce a marked increase in muscular power and activity. The subject can lift weights much heavier than he is capable of lifting under ordinary conditions. The operator can also suggest functional paralysis of the muscles. The entire body may be made rigid as a board, and this rigidity can be maintained for hours without apparent fatigue. Even the involuntary muscles and the vasomotor system are affected by suggestion. The rate of respiration and of the pulse can be increased or decreased. Nose-bleeding has been obtained. Defecation, urination, perspiration, the shedding of tears, and other secretory functions, have been successfully suggested. It is claimed that blistering of the skin can at times be suggested. Normal sensibility can be increased to a remarkable degree in hypnosis. One subject could read print reflected in the operator's eye. Attendants in mental hospitals have been hypnotized and their hearing sharpened, so that the slightest sound coming from the patients would be perceived, even though the attendants were asleep. Very minute differences in weight or temperature can be clearly distinguished. After a meal, hunger and thirst can be suggested, so that the subject will eat a second meal with relish. Just as sensibility can be increased in hypnosis, so it can also be effectually decreased, inhibited, and changed. Blindness, color blindness, double vision, deafness, change or loss of taste and smell, can be produced temporarily. Hunger and thirst can be alleviated and even removed. If the operator suggests anesthesia, the subject loses the sensation of touch; if he suggests analgesia, the subject no longer experiences pain. In such cases, the subject will not notice the thrust of a needle or of a knife through his flesh. Surgeons have performed operations on hypnotized subjects; one physician excised a very large tumor from a man and amputated a woman's leg below the knee. The production of sensory hallucinations in hypnotized persons is a common phenomenon. They can be made to see, hear, taste, smell, and feel practically anything the operator desires. The imagination produces images so vivid that to the subject they appear as real objects actually perceived. These hallucinations may be either positive or negative. If, for instance, the subject sees an article, and if the operator then suggests that a second article is placed in front of the former, hiding it from view, the subject will see the imaginary article and will not see the real article; this effect is a case of "positive" hallucination. Or, if the subject sees an article and sees a second article being placed behind the former, and if the operator then suggests the first article way, then the first article will (apparently) vanish, so that the subject sees the article hidden behind it; this effect is a case of "negative" hallucination. Hallucinations can also be post-hypnotically suggested, so that the subject, upon awakening, will see an imaginary cow or hear an imaginary orchestra, etc. When suggested by the operator, a subject will temporarily experience feelings (pleasure, displeasure) and emotions (fear, piety, anger, joy, disgust, etc.). Some types of mental disorders have been successfully treated by suggestion, particularly phobias; where complete cures have not been effected, improvement has often been obtained. Criminal Acts and Hypnotism Are hypnotized persons mere automatons, completely under the control of the hypnotist, so that they are irresistibly compelled to carry out his commands? If the hypnotist suggests a criminal act, such as theft, murder, arson, etc., must the subject obey, or can the subject resist? Liebault, Bernheim, and Beaunis, of the Nancy School, were convinced that subjects, while in the hypnotized condition, could be induced to commit crimes. Delbeouf, Bramwell, and most experimenters deny it. In the course of time, extensive experiments have been made along these lines, and a number of facts have been established which have an important bearing on this problem. Hypnotized persons are not mere automatons. The hypnotic state does not place them under the absolute control of the hypnotist. They do not lose the essential use of reason and will. They can and do resist suggestions; they can and do refuse to carry out orders. They act in this manner not only when the suggestions are morally offensive, but also when they are innocuous and indifferent. Many instances are on record where subjects have refused to obey out of sheer whim and caprice. Oftentimes subjects will not cooperate, although they are aware, as they themselves admit, that it is only an experiment, a "laboratory crime"; it offends their moral sense to do something which they know is nothing more than an "imaginary crime." It is true, of course, that subjects have been induced to perform "laboratory crimes," such as stabbing someone with a rubber or cardboard knife, putting poison (sugar, suggested as arsenic) in another's coffee, and so forth. These instances, however, prove nothing, because the experimenters were reputable men, and the subjects placed their trust in them, confident that a real crime would never be suggested. Are we to conclude that no real crimes have ever been committed by subjects under the hypnotic influence of unscrupulous operators? It would indeed be rash to deny either the possibility or the fact of the commission of genuine "hypnotic" crimes. Forel, after an examination of the pertinent material, comes to the conclusion that normal persons can always resist criminals suggestions, but that the childish, the psychopathically inferior, and the ethically weak and defective person, lacking moral balance and resistance, can be induced to commit real crimes through suggestion. Schrenk-Notzing and other agree with Forel and his opinion is, in all probability, the correct answer to the question. Virtuous persons cannot be compelled to commit, or to consent to, suggested crimes. It is not quite clear whether the operator, because he possesses their confidence, could break down their resistance by persuasion or false information. If, however, the criminal suggestion agrees with the principles, dispositions, and habits of the subject, it will probably be carried out. Leaving out of consideration the obscure opinions of the ancients and beginning with the views of Anton Mesmer, a number of theories have been advanced as an explanation of the nature of hypnotism. Magnetism. Mesmer and his followers considered the cause of hypnotic phenomena to be physical, namely, "animal magnetism," "magnetic or vital fluid," "od or odylic force." Scientists have been unable to discover any such force or fluid. The theory is crude and primitive, and it is totally discredited. Suggestion. Abbe Faria looked for the cause in suggestion, maintaining that everything comes from the hypnotized subject, not from the operator. So far he was correct. The operator merely directs the course of events; the phenomena originate in and by the subject at all times. Whatever happens has its cause in the subject's own nature. Suggestion, however, is not really the "cause" of hypnotic phenomena; it is merely the "signal" which sets the cause in action. Mono-Ideism. Braid's theory of mono-ideism points out the fact that there exists a considerable narrowing of consciousness in the hypnotized subject, and subsequent experiments have verified his contention. He was wrong, however, in restricting the concentration of consciousness to one single idea. He realized his error and later rejected mono-ideism, because it is possible to have more than a single hypnotic effect present at any given time. He advanced the understanding of hypnotism by stressing its psychic character. The Salpetriere School. According to Charcot and his followers, hypnosis is an artificially induced neurosis, and it can be produced only in persons suffering from hysteria. Since about eighty to ninety per cent of adults can be hypnotized, the vast majority of persons should be hysterical, which is not true. Soldiers, sailors, and students can readily be hypnotized, because of their habitual attitude of accepting commands (suggestions), and they are not hysterical. Charcot was also mistaken when he claimed that persons could be hypnotized by purely physical means and unknown to themselves. Hypnosis demands the cooperation of the subject, because hypnosis is primarily a psychical affair and the subject is the principal agent in the production of all phenomena, The Nancy School. Bernheim and his associates saw no real difference between natural sleep and the artificial sleep of hypnosis. A considerable difference, however, exists between the two states. Consciousness is responsive to the suggestions of the operator in hypnosis, but is not alert in natural sleep. Hypnosis lacks the haphazard character of dream states. Hypnosis tends to act out the suggestions of the operator externally, something rarely found in natural sleep. Bernheim also maintained that the hypnotized person is a mere automaton, without self-determination. The actions of the hypnotized subjects are, to a certain extent, automatic; but the subject is not thereby deprived of the power of self-determination, if he desires to use it. Hypnosis, the Nancy School asserts, is essentially increased suggestibility, and the increase is produced by suggestion itself. Increased suggestibility, however, is merely a symptom of hypnosis, not its essence. Suggestion and increased suggestibility do not explain the profound physiological and psychical changes which occur in hypnosis. Increased suggestibility seems to be rather the result than the cause of these changes. The real nature of hypnosis must lie deep down in the nervous and mental constitution of the subject. The Subliminal Mind. F.W. Myers, William James, and many others sought the explanation of the mystery of hypnosis in the "subliminal mind." Most of these authors look upon the subliminal mind as a mind distinct from, and independent of, the normal, supraliminal mind, having vastly more complex and accurate processes of mental activity than are found in the mind of the waking state. The subliminal mind is a fully developed "self," superior to the supraliminal self. This theory is inadequate, because it fails to account for all facts. Granting, for the sake of argument, the existence of such a secondary or subliminal mind as the agent of hypnotic phenomena, the appreciation and calculation of time in certain posthypnotic experiments receives no proper explanation. As a rule, the subject, even when re-hypnotized, has no memory of the calculation and has no knowledge of how the calculation was made. In other words, the subliminal mind itself is unaware of how the phenomenon was produced. Hence, a third or fourth mind must be postulated. In as much as psychologists have distinguished as many as a dozen and more "personalities" in one individual in various phases of hypnotic experience, consistency demands that we postulate the same number of subliminal minds or selves; but such a postulate seems unreasonable. The distinction between these "minds" or "selves" is based on the distinction between alternating consciousness and alternating memories. The one consciousness is supposed to be altogether different from the other or selves, and the one memory altogether different from the other or others. This difference, however, is not as great as is usually assumed. These consciousnesses and memories are not mutually exclusive, but overlap. As a matter of fact, a definite bond of unity runs through all the hypnotic phenomena of an individual. The knowledge and use, for example, of language is preserved and remembered in all states and stages of hypnotic experience, particularly if the subject knows and uses but a single language. As a rule, too, the subject retains his general knowledge of persons, objects, localities, etc. Such facts are evidence for the essential identity of memory and consciousness in every individual. It takes more than changes of moods and alternating groups of memory items to constitute distinct minds and selves in a person. Dissociation. Most modern psychologists find the cause of hypnotic phenomena in "mental dissociation." Joseph Jastrow is representative of this group. Here is his line of thought. Man's normal waking consciousness is characterized by the close and full association of his various faculties (senses, imagination, memory, intellect, will, etc.) and their activities. Normal experience is the result of three particular activities or "privileges," namely, incorporation, orientation, and initiative. When we have a sense impression of an object and are aware of it, we give it a place among our conscious perceptions; this process is termed incorporation. We are conscious at the same time of the relative position of this object among the other objects of the physical world. Thereby we adjust ourselves consciously to the outside world; the resulting adjustment is orientation. Ordinarily, our mental experience is such that we control and direct our ideas, perceptions, imaginings, etc.; in other words, we have initiative. The joint, associated, normal functioning of incorporation, orientation, and initiative constitutes our normal waking state. When any of these activities are interfered with, impaired, or absent, we speak of a dissociation. The effect of dissociation is a subnormal or abnormal mental state. Instances of subnormal states are sleep, profound distraction, dreams, etc.; instances of abnormal states are hysteria, somnambulism, intoxication, insanity, etc. Impairment of the "incorporative" activity makes us partially or totally unaware of our surroundings -- psychic anesthesia. We observe this state in hypnosis. The subject actually sees, hears, and feels things; but due to suggestion, he excludes the visual, auditory, and tactual images from his conscious experience and treats them as if they did not exist. Double personality arises, when the mind abnormally concentrates its attention on one group of experiences, thereby failing to incorporate this group of experiences into the normal stream of consciousness. Impairment of "orientation" brings on a partial or total inability to distinguish between imagined and objective reality. A person so afflicted lacks the corrective influence of external impressions on the workings of the imagination and accepts the images of the imagination as objectively real, as it happens in dreams. Hallucinations result from impaired orientation. Thus, in hypnosis, the suggestions of the operator, due to a restricted and narrowed consciousness, are not offset by corrective judgments based on external perception and consequently are taken for objective reality. When this impairment is profound, so that one group of memory images is split off from the rest, there may arise the hallucination of distinct empirical "selves" in the same individual, and then we speak of "double personality." Impaired initiative, since it involves partial or total lack of person control and direction, leads to imperative impulse and enforced action. A person with impaired initiative readily responds to an impulse imposed on the will by an outside agent. We observe this condition in hypnosis, where the operator's suggestions control and direct the actions of the subject. A marked impairment of initiative, together with an impairment of incorporation and orientation, is generally present in "double personality." The impairment of one or the other or all of these human "privileges" is present in all cases of mentally subnormal and abnormal conditions, ranging all the way from absentmindedness to permanent insanity. The theory of dissociation has the advantage that it preserves the essential unity and identity of the mind and self and avoids the improbabilities of the subliminal mind theory mentioned above. It does not, however, give a complete explanation of the mystery of hypnosis. What happens in the nervous system, particularly in the cortical centers of the brain, when there is an impairment or disturbance of incorporation, orientation, and initiative? And how can the willingness of the subject and the suggestion of the operator produce such a profound impairment or disturbance? Therein lies precisely the mystery of hypnosis, and a mystery, it seems, it may always remain. Among the various theories advanced in the course of the history of hypnotism, that of mental dissociation is the most promising. It agrees best thus far with the findings of psychology in other fields of research. The state of mind with the closest resemblance to hypnosis is the state of mind operative in sleepwalking. In sleepwalking (ordinary somnambulism), the mental images arouse the motor centers of the brain into carrying out bodily actions according to a fixed plan or idea (autosuggestion). In hypnotic somnambulism, the images producing bodily action come from the suggestion of the operator (hetero-suggestion). The underlying mental mechanism appears to be the same in both cases. |
|
|
Main Page & Index Enrich Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
[Homepage] [Newsletter] [Search] [Support the Academy] [Link to Us] [Contact the Academy] [Citing Articles from Our Website] [Privacy Policy & Disclaimer]
Copyright 1998-99, 2000-01, & 2002-03 by The Radical Academy. All Rights Reserved.