twitchb at worldnet.att.net wrote in message
<6hqtfo$j3c at bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>"Etherman" <etherman at mdc.net> wrote:
>>>>>twitchb at worldnet.att.net wrote in message
>><6hl4lr$epq at bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>...
>>>>>Most of the people had been subjected to hypnosis. A study
>>>commission by the Royal College of Psychiatrists published
>>>in the April edition of the British Journal of Psychiatry
>>>states that "any memory recovered through hynopsis, dream
>>>interpretation, or regression therapy is almost certainly
>>>wrong."
>>>>>>This is nothing more than an appeal to authority.
>>Would you please post some evidence that the study is
>incorrect?
Could you please provide some evidence that the study is
correct?
>>Even a
>>casual perusal of psychological journals demonstrates
>>that hypnosis can, in some circumstances, improve
>>memory.
>>This is nothing more than a claim with no evidence provided.
I've posted references in the past. Why should I believe you'll
look them up this time?
>>Even when it is detrimental it's a stretch
>>to say that the memories are almost certainly wrong
>>(unless by wrong they mean <100% accurate).
>>>A UFO believer made an experiment with a physician with
>clinical experience in hypnosis. They hypnotized subjects
>who had never claimed to be abducted and asked them to
>imagine that they had been abducted.
What exactly do you mean by UFO believer? Lawson does
not believe that people are being abducted by space aliens.
AFAIK he never believe that UFO were spaceships.
>He found out that these imaginary abductees stories "showed
>no substantive differences" between them and the stories of
>supposed abductess.
>>"one should be cautious about the results from hypnotic
>regression in UFO investigations. A witness can lie..
>witnesses can subtly confuse their own fantasies with
>reality - without either the witness or the hypnotist being
>aware."
>>(What can we learn from Hypnosis of Imaginary Abductees by
>Alvin H. Lawson)
I agree that his results should be looked at. But he believes
the ultimate origin of abductions is from birth trauma, not
confusing fantasy with reality.
>Doctor Martin Orne, past president of the International
>Society of Experimental Hypnosis, published a paper in the
>International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis.
>>The paper is entitled THE USE AND MISUSE OF HYPNOSIS IN
>COURT.
>>"it is possible for an individual to feign hypnosis and
>deceive even highly experienced hypnotists... Further, it is
>possible for even deeply hypnotized subjects to willfully
>lie."
>>"We should keep in mind that psychologists and psychiatrists
>are not particularly adept at recognizing deception... the
>average hotel credit manager is considerably more adept at
>recognizing deception than we are."
Who's talking about using it in court?
>(John Mack certainly proved him right here!)
Why because one person in his study may have been lying?
She said she fabricated her story, but how do we know
she was being honest about lying?
>"If the hypnotist has beliefs about what actually occurred,
>it is exceedingly difficult for him to prevent himself from
>inadvertently guiding the subject's recall so that he (the
>subject) will eventually "remember" what he, the hypnotist,
>believes actually happened."
This is simplistic at best. There are many factors that
determine the accuracy of hypnotic recall.
Etherman
The Internet's sole purpose is to get porn and
bomb making plans into the hands of children.
etherman at mdc.net
