sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosis

[Andiferous]

Lately, I have become highly suspect of hypnosis and to some extent, Freud's theory of a sub or unconscious mind filled with hidden or blocked memories and identities. Not that I don't believe people block or ignore memories and such, but the idea that there is some secret consciousness sorter within our head that stuffs them in oblivious storage beyond the average person's intellectual reach. I have started wondering if the idea of "hypnosis" itself is not much more than psychologically "safe" state that may demonstrate the power of mind to forget or remember ideas and thoughts to be released by the power of suggestion. I also tend to think Freud was a real crackpot.

What do you think?

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

I think that you are correct and that mirandansa will soon start posting in this thread to disagree with you.

 

[Andiferous]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

Well, whomever does, I am well versed in my phallic symbols and waterish Oedipus and very capable of trying for a rational response.

 

[rosemari]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

What is the best Hypnosis Community Site to visit? I have been interested in hypnosis and NLP for a while. Does anyone know of a really good Hypnosis Community site?

 

[Case]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

What's up with all the thread necromancing lately?

 

[CosmicSpork]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

Potential spammer getting through the net. If you search for "Hypnosis Community Site" on google the same phrase has been spammed a few places.

Exact same phrase, different usernames, same case on the words.

Bannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnned.

 

[AndromedasWake]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

Potential spammer getting through the net. If you search for "Hypnosis Community Site" on google the same phrase has been spammed a few places.

Exact same phrase, different usernames, same case on the words.

Bannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnned.

But I wanted to know of a really good Hypnosis Community site you big spoil sport! :cry:

It did look a bit sus, but I was too lazy to do the google check!

 

[Andiferous]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

Well, I am flattered for the attention.

 

[Case]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

On that note, Andi, I didn't get your OP, care to elaborate?

 

[Andiferous]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

It's been a while, but quite simply, I was asking if people thought psychoanalysis and hypnosis was bullocks or not. (sorry, I tend to spell bollocks bullocks because it reminds me of cattle.)

 

[Case]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

It's been a while, but quite simply, I was asking if people thought psychoanalysis and hypnosis was bullocks or not. (sorry, I tend to spell bollocks bullocks because it reminds me of cattle.)

Ooh, I see. I definitely consider psychoanalysis to be bollocks. Studying psychology at a university where methodologically sound methods are emphasised and criticism of bad methodology wildly encouraged, does that to you, I guess. That, and I took a course called "Psychological Interventions I" where we learned about 1) the statistics and got to listen to 2) a psychoanalyst who talked about his craft.

a) Psychoanalysis aims to unravel a person's personality, their state of mind, the (mental) reasons for their behaviour, it is NOT aimed at improving anything.
b) Psychoanalytic therapy is aimed at improving things, but usually therapy consists of weekly sessions for about 7 years on average. Only some people actually improve, everyone pays a shitload of money. That is the textbook example of charlatanry.

Hypnosis... I don't know. Haven't tried it, haven't read any reliable, relevant literature dealing with it... so... yea, no idea.
From the research I have read about, one could conclude that not everything we perceive reaches conscious perception, but that is a computational limit rather than a mysterious phenomenon. It's functionally impractical to perceive on a direct, literal level, because processing restrictions would prevent you from actually analysing and interpreting 'what it is you're seeing'.

It's a bit of a stretch, but compare this to severe cases of autism: many of them can't filter sensory input properly, hindering metaprocessing. It is extremely unlikely that you can 'access subconscious memories' by inducing a state of 'hypnosis', though. It seems much more likely that what happens during hypnosis is the result of suggestion.

 

[Andiferous]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

Thanks Case.

I suppose the "does the subconscious exist" question is key to a lot of this, and I admit that I tend to throw that into the whole Freudian ring. It would be easy to argue against subconscious by analysing the nature of short term and long term memory. Is there an invisible sentience that directs our actions in a seemingly methodical way, while inaccessible to us? That seems like a rather big leap for me.

I've also got little faith in Freud. His theories are prevalent in many different disciplines, but most of them seem ridiculous, and to be honest, brutally prejudiced. (ie: underlying sex/parent-love/phallic references resonating throughout all our actions and dreams, infiltrating all aspects of literature, art, and culture, as seen through universal images like water, tunnels, spikes, and the inevitable drive for women to long for their own penis etc). It's almost funny, were it not considered serious academia at some point (sometimes now).

I'm not a big Jungian either, but this is another story.

Hypnosis: Like Mesermer and his performances, I'm inclined to believe that the actions of those under influence were in no way supernatural and likely due to the person's focus and desire to meditate under suggestion. People do have the power of concentration and self-meditation, enabling themselves to fall under suggestion. I also do wonder if a person can communicate while experiencing dreaming, although a link to hypnosis is tentative at best. The existence of hypnosis can't be measured in any reliable way, and the suggestion of it is off the wall, by today's standards. Don't you think?

I do agree that dreaming closely resembles what you describe, in a random play of ideas and memories that a subject may not remember or be immediately aware of.

Additionally, the 'power of suggestion' seems to be linked to old fashioned operant conditioning. A classic case of association and Pavlov's bell.

I started this thread out of curiosity a long time ago, hard to remember my train of thought.

 

[Case]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

The topic of dreaming is wholly different altogether, but equally messy, haha. Our resident experts have some interesting ideas, but we are far from even a consensus about the utility of sleep. Dreams and the reasons we have them are even further down that road. It's quite funny how sleep is a universal phenomenon but still so very poorly understood.

Small correction: Pavlov's dogs are a case of classical conditioning, whereas operant conditioning is something you'd find Skinner doing when he trains doves to do crazy things in order to receive food pellets. Classical conditioning pairs unconditioned stimuli with conditioned stimuli to turn an unconditioned response into a conditioned response - on the level of natural reflexes; operant conditioning works with rewards (possibly punishment, but this often leads to unpredictable behavioural changes) to change behaviour.

 

[Andiferous]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

You're really good and really quick

 

[Case]

Re: sub/unconscious, psychoanalysis, crazy Freud and hypnosi

Why, thank you. I'm about to make this my trade after all, so I better stay informed.

I'm not sure if I've mentioned this before, but if you're interested in personality theories, the one I find most intriguing is George Kelly's Personal Construct Theory. If I had to pick the most elegant theory, this would be it. I doubt it meets the requirements of a scientific theory, but still an inspiring read.