| |
| |
Hubbard the Stage Hypnotist Series Hubbard, the Master Stage Hypnotist! Index The Anderson Report Use of the "Confusion Technique" in scientology Hypnosis in scientology - The Gradation Chart Revealed - LINK Hypnosis Is Hubbard Denounced by Inventor of the E-Meter Hypnosis Demonstration and Collective on Hubbard's Use of Covert Hypnosis - Exposed 1952 Journal of Hypnosis article, "Instantaneous Hypnosis" by Harry Arons scientology's Source of the "E-Meter Stress Test" and More From 1943 - George Estabrooks A Comparison of Hypnosis and Auditing from Ex-Member who Became a Certified Clinical Hypnotherapist Hubbard's own statements about Hypnosis from his books and Scientology official publications. The Rape of the Mind by Joost Meerloo 1957 - LINK Support the effort to expose Scientology today! |
 |
 Hypnosis and Dianetics By Lewis J Roberts
A great deal of controversy has been
caused by L. Ron Hubbard in his recent
book, DIANETICS. In view of the fact
that Mr. Hubbard has chosen to condemn
Hypnosis in the process of presenting
his theories, it seems appropriate to state
here a brief rebuttal to certain aspects
of DIANETICS. My purpose is not to
repudiate Mr. Hubbard's theories,
techniques and conclusions; rather, it is my
feeling that certain of his assertions
require clarification and amplification.
Let it first be said that `dianetics' is not
a new theory. Dianetic nomenclature is
new in its usage; but if one examines it
carefully, it's the same old sofa, but with
new upholstery.
Despite the provocative issues in this
book, any person endeavoring to become
a dianetic auditor should have a basic
knowledge of the science of hypnosis and
suggestion. This becomes obvious as one
reads DIANETICS in spite of the fact
that the author vehemently denies any
connection. For instance, Mr. Hubbard
states on page 384 of his book:
"Hypnotism can be extremely aberrative
and may hold up a case. An auditor
should have some working knowledge
of it so that he can release the
engram it makes, not so he can work
dianetics."
This quote from the book is one of
many references Mr. Hubbard makes to
Hypnosis, proving time and time again
that Hypnosis, and a working knowledge
of it, is important and helpful in the
competent practice of dianetic therapy.
On page 56 of his book Mr. Hubbard
admits, concerning post-hypnotic
suggestion, that:
" . . understanding the mechanism of
the post-hypnotic suggestion can aid in
an understanding of aberration."
A cursory reading of the book will
prove that every method of auditing
advocated therein is fundamentally one
used in Hypnosis. True, the labels are
different. . . . However, let us analyze
this statement and see if we are incorrect
in our conclusion.
The so-called state of `reverie' is com-
parable to the various depths of Hypnosis.
A dianetic patient who can go into
a deep state of `reverie' can contact
engrams and engrammic key-ins more
readily than a patient who goes into a
light state. This is also true of Hypnosis,
plus the fact that many hypnotic
subjects (as well as dianetic patients)
work well in a light state. Mr. Hubbard
says to work your patient `where you find
him'-whether in a deep hypnotic trance
or a state of `reverie'. Surely, one must
know when a patient is in the hypnotic
trance, and this condition can only be
recognized by some one completely familiar
with Hypnosis.
A refractory subject, as known in
hypnotic parlance, is a difficult one to
work with and requires time and patience
to help, therapeutically speaking. In
dianetics, a non-sonic patient is in a similar
condition and requires the same time and
patience to reach.
Let us continue this analysis a bit
farther. Mr. Hubbard emphasis and
reemphasizes that dianetics is not hypnosis.
He points out that suggestions must
never be given to the dianetic patient. On
page 385 of his book he says:
"Never install a positive suggestion of
any kind in a patient no matter how
much he may beg for one. It has
proven nearly fatal."
Here we have a contradiction which
proves a little difficult to reconcile
because in discussing methods and
techniques, Hubbard advises the auditor to
make the following (positive)
suggestions to the patient:
"You will know everything which goes
on. You will be able to remember
everything that happens. You can
exercise your own control. If you do
not like what is happening, you can
instantly pull out of it."
(This last statement is a dangerous one
and should have the following appendage:
"Before pulling out of it of your own
volition, please ask my permission first."
This statement, or suggestion, protects
the patient from any emotional shock
due to an abrupt awakening which will
undoubtedly have a definite post-hypnotic
or post-dianetic effect.
But to continue with the auditor's
instructions (suggestion, really) to the
patient, the auditor says next:
"Look at the ceiling."
This is pure and simple hypnotic objective fixation.
"Then, when I count from one to seven
your eyes will close."
This, too, can scarcely be denied as
suggestion as used in Hypnosis. Hubbard
has banned suggestion, and yet he uses
it as the very tool with which to get the
patient into a state of `reverie'.
In getting the patient on the Hubbard
to the Feed-Back or Subjective method of
-rime Track' of his life, a method similar
this is accomplished the patient then is
Hypnotic Fixation, is employed. When
able to re-live the somatic experience
and eventually the engram. In order to
erase it completely, the experience or
engram is repeated and repeated by the
patient until all force of the emotion is
erased or, in the vernacular, wrung out
as you would a wet cloth. This same
feat can and has been accomplished by
Hypnosis.
The so-called `canceller' is merely another
method of awakening the patient
and wiping the mental slate clean. To
actually awaken a dianetic patient you
say (page 202, DIANETICS):
"'Come to present time. Are you in
present time?' (Yes) Use canceller
word. `When I count from 5 to 1 and
snap my fingers you will feel alert
and awaken."
What is this but Hypnosis?
Furthermore, please note the
positive suggestion
given to the patient:
"YOU WILL FEEL ALERT"
I am inclined to agree that it is not
wise to mix theories of therapeutics no
more than a chemist would mix chemicals
knowing that an explosion may result.
Much harm has been done by this
practice, especially where several schools
of diametrically opposed thinking and
teaching are being practiced by any one
practitioner. By the same token, I cannot
agree on the condemnation of any
one science, because basically all are
good. There is actually no panacea for
everything.
NO ONE SCIENCE IS SUFFICIENT UNTO ITSELF.
Where one system will fail, another will be
successful. Dianetics will have its failures
as well as any other system.
Certainly mankind is searching for a
science of mental healing. All thinking
men welcome the contribution of DIANETICS
to this search. But we must not
grab at straws, strong as they may look,
and discontinue the searching or cease to
examine theories in a scientific light. A
true science admits its antecedents and
relationship to those sciences which predate it.
A new science, if valid, will prove itself and
in time we will see the cessation of the use
of obsolete, discredited methods.
However, let us recognize the fact that
suggestion (Hypnosis) is a part of our
every day life. Man is a creature of suggestion.
If Dianetics aims to free man
from this enslavement, certainly it is
vital to know and understand the functions,
accomplishments and powers of
suggestion. This, fundamentally, is the
study of Hypnosis.
To balance the scales, I sincerely believe
that DIANETICS has a place in
therapy, and much good can be
accomplished for many, many people. Thoughts
and ideas sink deeply into the subconscious mind,
or as Hubbard calls it, `the
reactive memory bank', which profoundly
influence our actions and reactions every
day we live. These deeply buried ideas,
thoughts or so-called `engrams' can be a
determining factor of our success or
failure, our health or lack of it, our personality
and character. This has been
common knowledge for many years.
It is my contention, that any science, to
completely fill the role of healing, must
be able to discover the cause of illness
and distractions which are hidden in the
mind. If Dianetics has discovered a new
way to obtain and release these aberrations
from the human mind more quickly
and permanently, then Dianetics should
be given the opportunity to prove itself
beyond a doubt. Until such a time,
DIANETICS, in itself, is not sufficient reason
to jettison every existing theory of mental
healing or to declare Dianetics the
panacea to all illness. My advice is to
read the book thoroughly. Digest it.
Try it. If it works for you, then it is a
successful therapy.
In closing, may I reiterate, this is a defense
and vindication of the age old science
of hypnosis and suggestion insofar
as dianetics' is concerned.
Mr. Hubbard, unfortunately, put himself
in the position of being hypnosis'
judge, jury and executioner. He failed to
realize or take cognizance of the fact
that hypnosis and suggestion are a
recognized science and what he contends can
be accomplished with his theory of
dianetics can be accomplished as easily and
better with hypnosis and suggestion.
|
Home | F.A.Q.'s | Legal | News | Support lermanet.com | |
