|
| |
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 Dianetics in the 1952 Journal of Hypnosis and "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 Scientology's Private Army of Private Investigators
Son of Scientology - An interview with Ron Dewolfe Pulitzer Prize Winnning 14 Part series in the St. Petersburg Times Offlines.Org Warrior's Archive The Very Strange Death of L Ron Hubbard the King of CONs Through the Door: Movies that are helpfuf for understanding Scientology: |
Peter Forde: Hypnotic Coercion Uncovered Via Coue
This is an OLD article from 1988 that I never published. The
material in it was dropped out when a proofreader got very sarcastic:
"So now hypnotism is reduced to a mathematical formula is it?"
A year later that reader came around entirely to my point of view,
but used another model to describe hypnotism in terms of pacing,
leading, trance-induction, trance-deepening and ratification. His
model is valid but is not used here, and would not uncover what I've
uncovered here. - -
ALL STAFF MEMBERS KNOWINGLY USE HYPNOTIC MEANS! Every staff
member is briefed on the subject of letter-writing early on, where
a senior staff member called "HCO Area Secretary" shows them two
policy letters about why they write letters. These policy letters
are confidential with very limited availability. In one of them
Hubbard writes to the effect that "people are slightly hypnotic,
and repeatedly asking them in eventually fetches them in." Were
the new staff member to query this he would be given an
end-justifies-the-means argument about people's minds being
booby-trapped against improvement activity, therefore we have to
take them over for their own good. The new staff member has to
join in with writing letters or face disciplinary action for his
non-compliance.
Hypnosis is heavily used within Scientology and Dianetics, but is
not known by Scientologists to be so widespread. In this essay I
will attempt to explain the basics of hypnosis that Hubbard
concealed, and to show where I've seen it acting.
From the Encyclopaedia Britannica Macropaedia; Hypnotism "The
hypnotised individual appears to heed only the communications of
the hypnotist. He seems to respond in an uncritical automatic
fashion, ignoring all aspects of the environment other than those
made relevant by the hypnotist... Generally psychoanalysts tended
to view hypnosis as a somewhat masked intimate personal
relationship... In general hypnosis cannot be induced against a
person's will. Occasionally experiments have been reported in
which the individuals were asked to resist, but nevertheless were
hypnotised. In all such examples the hypnotist solicited the
subject's cooperation in an experiment; only then did he ask for
resistance.
Hypnosis as a word was first coined by James Braid in 1843. It
derives from the Greek 'hypnos' meaning sleep. He soon repented of
the word because it was misleading, but it had caught on in the
public imagination and could not be changed. In fact while a
subject can appear sleepy to an observer, he is actually
experiencing a heightening of awareness in some direction,
accompanied by emotion. The sleepiness or vacant appearance, if
manifesting, is because attention is off the present time
environment. Braid respectabilised Mesmerism by calling it
hypnotism and publishing a medical book on the subject. It would
have caught on widely but chemical anaesthetics werre invented
about then, and hypnotism was eclipsed by their subsequent
publicity.
The person who best mastered the subject of hypnosis, and who
also published prolific observations on the subject, was Emile
Coue. Others have condensed his observations into 3 Laws and 4
Observations:
Law 1. The law of concentrated attention.
This states that what people put their minds upon, they tend to
adopt.
Law 2. The law of reversed effort.
This states that an effort of will to overcome an idea, only
reinforces that idea. e.g. A person decides not to think about a
donkey's tail and then can do no other!
Law 3. The law of affect (affect = emotion)
This states that a person is suggestible in the direction of his
emotion. N.B. Contrary to Hubbard's teachings, this means ANY
emotion, enthusiasm as well as apathy.
Observation 1. When the will and the imagination are in
antagonism, it is always the imagination which wins. WITHOUT
EXCEPTION.
Observation 2. In the conflict between the will and the
imagination, the force of the imagination is in direct ratio to the
square of the will.
Observation 3. When the will and the imagination are in
agreement, one does not add to the other, but one is multiplied by
the other.
Observation 4. The imagination can be directed.
The reader can check the above with the Scientology definitions
for hypnosis, and will find general agreement. The only specific
false information given out by Hubbard that conflict are in the
processes called "CCH" and in the book "Science of Survival". In
CCH or Communication, Control and Havingness processing, orienting
the subject to his present-time environment is supposed to
dehypnotize him, but in fact by mustering attention and getting him
used to being controlled it has the opposite effect; getting him
controllable and tranced (Law 1 of concentrated attention). In the
book "Science of Survival", chapter on hypnotic level, it is
asserted that higher toned people are not hypnotisable. In fact
cheerful or apathetic, all can be hypnotised (Law 3, of affect).
In the registration interview, persistence in not letting the
client leave until hes sold. (Law 1 concentrating attention)
Moving attention about the client's ruins and goals in life and
linking improvement to Scientology services (4th observation..
directed imagination). Engaging the clients imagination re ruins,
goals, Scientology and throwing it into conflict with the client's
will of sales resistance and his rational thought (Law 2, Reversed
effort, Observation 1, imagination wins in any conflict with the
will).
If the client backs out forcefully, he may be told "Come back
when you've changed your mind" (Law 2 of reversed effort,
Observation 2, imagination wins in any conflict with the will).
An apparently accidental guard against future backouts, but
nevetheless effective, comes at the end of the registration
interview. The client is asked "Have you truly made this decision
on your own independent cognizance?" The client at this point in
time is fired-up, and has been worn down on independent thinking,
and so tends to say "Yes". Of course the client has had his
"independent cognizance" carefully manipulated during the
preceeding period, so "Yes" is a logically untrue answer. But to
reverse this affirmation later would invalidate the client's sense
of integrity as he recalled his affirmative "Yes" answer, so he is
thus somewhat inhibited from considering hypnosis in the interview.
With most clients there is some element of fear involved in any
contemplation of confrontations in trying to leave the interview.
That this fear is exploited is alas very much the case. Hubbard
formally forbids "Crush selling" where penalties are threatened if
the client doesn't buy, but I've known a registrar do just that,
and at the time I left he was still working as registrar. More
recently a man was detained overnight in the Registrar office, and
they wouldn't let him go until he signed blank pieces of paper in
application of a bank overdraft (then filled them in and raided his
bank account). Fear is a good way of trapping and intensifying
attention, and thus of enhancing suggestibility, but because its so
antagonstc to rational thought it is combatted and thus less
dangerous than Affinity, Reality and simple Communication as the
conveyor belts for suggestions.
In training, the Communication Course and CCH processing have
as their directly-stated purpose the facilitating of control over
others and of being controlled. They are a means of attacking a
person's acquired defence mechanisms against hypnotic control -
(e.g. avoiding eye contact). The student / client accepts the
training because it imparts confidence in controlling others and
because it manifestly brings him into "present time" (which is the
Scientology environment and pleasant thoughts about changes for the
better). These training routines muster attention and enable
attention to be more easily mustered in future (Law 1 concentrated
attention). They develop affinity between the persons involved
and the organisation. (Law 1 concentrated attention, Law 3 Affect)
The client's only effective barrier to future manipulation from
here on is rational thought combined with keeping his mouth shut.
All training centres around Ron Hubbard's written and
tape-recorded words, and he is on record as being a capable
hypnotist. Dissent is stifled by limited communication and the
possibility of disciplinary action. Thus Law 1 is engaged to the
limit, and 4th Observation (directed imagination) applies. Present
and future students of Hubbard's should take careful note of how he
tries to inhibit wider study of psychology, and of hypnotism in
particular.
Essays are required to be written, relating the material being
studied to the person's own life experiences. Having had one's
memories so carefully and systematically linked to materials being
studied, the student will have trouble later on in thinking outside
the Scientology framework (2nd Law or reversed effort implied).
This is a classic tactic used by North Korean Communists in their
brainwashing.
At the end of the training action comes a mandatory requirement
to write a success story. The trainee is constrained to write
things favourable to Scientology, and in doing so he implicitly
accepts the training, with all its contained criticism of other
ways of thinking, as valid. This is a favoured trick used by cults
and no-free-speech groups to undermine independent, considered
opinion of the client.
In Dianetics, hypnotic states and a high level of suggestibility
are very evident, but the practitioner is usually careful to add no
suggestions. One suggestion is made routinely however: that the
client is a 'preclear'. Practitioners are routinely directed to
sell their clients and prospective clients on the idea of "clearing
the reactive mind out". This is a direct manipulation of the
clients goals from whatever they were, towards the mythical state
of "clear". Whatever "Clear" means, and the definition goalposts
move according to your state of involvement in Scientology, it has
never been acheived by anybody, ever, and is simply a ploy to
foster dependency upon Scientology. Manipulation of a client's
goals in this manner is a breach of the Duty of Care, and is
actionable under Torts.
- In counselling as with training, the client is brought to
end-off on a high. It is in this excitable state that he is sent,
first for "Attest" where the mandatory success story is written,
thus accepting the counselling before giving whats happened
leisurely scrutiny. Then still excited, the client goes to the
Registrar to be sold more services. The client is at this point in
time excited and introverted, thus hypnosis is easily used to sell
him more services.
General notes. Applying intention to control another is
definitely hypnotically oriented. It will indeed mesmerise another
to wear a smart uniform, be mysterious, somewhat incomprehensible
and bossy. Having as purpose to make the hypnotised individual
similarly 'intentional' is just prosyletising to make more of the
same. People are not truly free when they become Scientologists as
the mind-enslavement is trapping them about as thoroughly as the
distress and problems they have left behind, if perhaps more
comfortably. Hubbard had a name for what I call mind-enslavement,
he called it "Channelling", picturing it as a bridge that people
must cross, could fall off, mustn't stop on, and needed shepherding
to keep them moving on it. And oh, the glorious sky-high causes he
built around the words "Bridge" and "Clear". These notions
contains both the imagination-directing elements (4th Observation),
and the traps for peoples feet.
It is possible to undo the effects of the Registrar interviews,
channelling actions, success story confusions and all other
hypnotic actions in Scientology simply by learning Coue's laws and
observations, getting a good grasp on how they can apply, then
scanning for the moments of decision, and what happened just before,
to see where such influences were brought to bear on you.
Therapies run that were of benefit remain of benefit.
To get a correct perspective on the usefulness or otherwise of
the Scientology training and materials, it is important to get to
know the strengths and weaknesses of the man who wrote them. A
good way to spot his deceits is to watch out for harshly critical
natter from him, then tag whats spotted as a possible pointer to
hypocrisy. Thus when he rails about psychiatrists being only good
for banks accounts, thats a clue! If he rails against
psychoanalysts who gain status according to the length of time they
can hold on to a client, thats a clue! If he speaks angrily
against those who practice hypnotism, thats a clue! And if he
rails stridently against those who practice slavery, that a major
clue also. If he rails on against those who practice christianity
exclusively, thats a clue too.. (in fact Hubbard was allied to the
Ordo Templi Orientis, a Satanic group run by Aleister Crowley.)
This essay has concentrated on some hypnotic aspects of
Scientology channelling. Its is not exhaustive of techniques used,
nor is the Coue model either up-to-date or the only applicable
hypnosis model. I hope it helps though.. it certainly got me out!
Peter Forde 14th April 1988, revised 17th February 1995.
To be, or not to be, that is the question: |
Home | F.A.Q.'s | Legal | News | Support lermanet.com | |