Analysis Of Hypnosis As A Part Of Pseudoscience
Hypnosis is one of the most controversial pseudoscientific topics being discussed around the world today. Pseudoscience is a system of theories, presumptions, and methods imprecisely being regarded as scientific. Hypnosis is pseudoscientific topic that should be viewed more skeptically because there’s no way to effectively test it, it lacks consistency with patients, and it’s devoid of plausibility.
Hypnosis is pseudoscientific because there’s no method of effectively analyzing its validity. Science systemises knowledge in the form of, “testable explanations and predictions” as guidelines for the defined process known as the Scientific Method. According to the standards of Science, hypnosis strays away from the scientific method and further towards the concept of pseudoscience. The article “Is Hypnosis Science or Pseudoscience?” found on Andrew Dobson’s Mindfit Hypnosis and Subliminal Message website informs the public about the controversial discussion over hypnosis, and examines whether hypnosis is actually backed up by science or pseudoscience because it can’t actually be testes. Dobson formulates his article by explaining the dictionary definition of science and how “scientific investigation must follow the scientific method”. Following his in depth description of what science is and isn’t, Dobson contrasts hypnotherapy and hypnotherapists to explain how their misconception of hypnosis is actually pseudoscience because of the lack of evidence. Considering how hypnosis is defined as the induced state of consciousness in which a person “supposedly” loses all power to voluntarily act meanwhile becoming more responsive towards suggestion, a person performing hypnosis can’t physically explain what is causing this trance like state let alone decipher how or why. Hypnotherapists main goal focuses on producing a result rather than analyzing the validity of the result that is actually being obtained. The public fails to realize that claims made by hypnotherapists that lack supporting evidence on how an actual understanding was formulated create issues of credibility making the claim invalid. In this instance, hypnosis quickly becomes a pseudoscience, “when there is no causation of a claim made”, or if the hypnotherapist fails to show how it is effectively tested.
Hypnosis lacks consistency with patients allowing scientists to question its reliability. Recent studies confirm that, “not everyone is susceptible to hypnosis”. Because not everyone is susceptible to hypnosis, this can result in skewed test conclusions and unreliable results when analyzing data. Research conducted from doctors at the Stanford School of Medicine exhibits that “even highly hypnotizable people may not benefit from hypnotherapy” because individual sessions of hypnosis aren’t guaranteed to produce long lasting results. Even a person who undergoes the process and experiences hypnosis usually “will have to undergo a series of hypnotic procedures to reinforce whatever constructive suggestions may be given”. In the article “The Truth About Hypnosis” Clifford N. Lazarus elucidates the truth about hypnosis by systematically providing facts regarding the fiction about clinical hypnosis. Lazarus commences his article by defining what hypnosis is in order for the public audience to interpret the “myths and misconceptions that surround hypnotherapy”. Lazarus supports his claim by providing a known fact that not everyone is susceptible to hypnosis. How can hypnotherapists measure the effectivity of hypnosis if the process doesn’t consistently work? Consistency aids in the establishment of credibility, so without consistency, hypnosis can’t be perceived as a reliable method. The lack of regularity with hypnotism enables researchers to scrutinize its dependability.
After reading the article “Not Getting Sleepy? Research Explains Why Hypnosis Doesn't Work for All”, Brandt elaborates on the fact that some people are more susceptible to hypnosis than others. Several doctors from Stanford University conducted an experiment to test the variation of hypnosis on people with high hypnotizability and low hypnotizability. Their conclusion from this experiment was that,“one-quarter of the patients they see cannot be hypnotized” because the underlying problems exists within the brain of each individual person. Hypothetically speaking, if hypnosis was real, then it would apply to everyone instead of some people being more prone to the illusion than others.
In order for us to be considered as a well informed society, we need to view hypnosis more skeptically because it’s devoid of plausibility. People fail to realize that, “you can do the same things with hypnosis that you can do without it”. Hypnotism is just a method for hypnotist’s to get patients to comply with their suggestions while in a relaxed state. The simple truth is that hypnosis is, “merely a state of extreme relaxation and concentration, similar to yoga, meditation, and tai chi”. The article titled “Hypnosis: A hoax or a healer?” by Linda Pearson explains key factors about the invalidness of hypnosis, and concludes that hypnosis can be interpreted in many different ways depending predominantly on the person. Once people view hypnosis more skeptically, they will soon understand that people possess the individual control to direct their own mental processes. Until science can prove that hypnosis is effective, hypnosis will still be considered a pseudoscientific topic that lacks feasibility. Hypnosis needs to be viewed more skeptically because its lack of plausibility goes against everything the scientific method stands for.
In all aspects of reality, pseudoscience is not about opinions or supporting a certain subject. It’s about being able to differentiate the key differences in science and pseudoscience. The article “Hypnotism Does Not Exist” from the Independent website explains how credible psychologists don't believe that hypnosis is real. The psychologists state their claim by contending, “that stage hypnosis is not a question of meddling in people's subconscious but is more a question of audience credulity”. The article utilizes logos and ethos to provide data and statistics in order to persuade the intended audience that hypnosis is nothing but a fantasy of the mind. Graham Wagstaff, a psychologist at Liverpool University who has been studying hypnosis for 20 years, “doesn’t believe that their is any such thing as hypnosis”.
The Amazing Kreshin, an experienced hypnotist, is so certain that hypnosis is a theatrical scheme that “he has offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who can prove that hypnosis exists”. By establishing ethos, Wagstaff and Kreshin introduce their expertise to portray to the public that they are credible sources worth adhering to. The article “Is There Any Scientific Explanations for Hypnosis?” by Susan Blackmore also takes a deep look into the science behind hypnosis. Blackmore initiates her article by stating that no scientist can agree on this diverse topic which insinuates that it can’t be classified as a science. Blackmore incorporates two main theories into her article degrading the credibility of hypnosis, one being that all these effects are better off being explained by role playing and suggestibility. Hypnosis is such a controversial topic that people are willing to be easily susceptible to the idea of it which leads to is being incorrectly classified as a science, when really it's a pseudoscience.
In conclusion, hypnosis being a topic of controversy has allowed scientists to conclude that it’s indeed a pseudoscientific topic. Hypnosis is just a system of theories and presumptions imprecisely being regarded as a science. Hypnosis is pseudoscientific because there’s no way to effectively test the validity of the claims being made, and because it lacks consistency when developing data among patients. Also, hypnotherapy is a pseudoscience because it recounts metaphysics which prevents accurate conclusions from being formulated correctly. For a topic to be considered as a scientific theory, it must qualify as testable, maintain progression, be able to be corrected, and prove to be consistent. Because hypnosis doesn’t follow the guidelines of the scientific method, the lack of plausibility and reliability of hypnosis should prompt the public in viewing hypnosis more skeptically as a pseudoscientific topic.
Works Cited
- Lazarus, Clifford N. “The Truth About Hypnosis.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 29 Jan. 2013, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201301/the-truth-about-hypnosis.
- Dobson, Andrew. “Is Hypnosis Science or Pseudoscience?” Mindfit Hypnosis and Subliminal Message MP3 Downloads, 14 May 2018, www.mindfithypnosis.com/is-hypnosis-science/.
- Wilkie, Brian Cathcart And Tom. “Hypnotism Does Not Exist, Say the Experts.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 23 Oct. 2011, www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hypnotism-does-not-exist-say-the-experts-1389968.html.
- Pearson, Linda. 'Hypnosis: A Hoax Or a Healer?' Nurse Practitioner, vol. 27, no. 8, 2002, pp. 8. ProQuest, https://login.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/docvi ew/222348201?accountid=7122.
- Blackmore, Susan. “Is There Any Scientific Explanation for Hypnosis?” Science Focus – BBC Focus Magazine, www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/is-there-any-scientific-explanation-for-hypnosis/.
- Brandt, Michelle. “ot Getting Sleepy? Research Explains Why Hypnosis Doesn't Work for All.” EHR National Symposium, 3 Oct. 2012, www.med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2012/10/not-getting-sleepy-research-explains-why-hypno sis-doesnt-work-for-all.html.ZDX
- http://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-well/201301/the-truth-about-hypnosis
- http://www.mindfithypnosis.com/is-hypnosis-science/
- http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/hypnotism-does-not-exist-say-the-experts-1389968.html
- https://login.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest com.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/docview/222348201?accountid=7122
- https://login.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.libweb.lib.utsa.edu/docview/222348201?accountid=7122
- http://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/is-there-any-scientific-explanation-for-hypnosis/
