The August Meet

Well once again the last Thursday group met up in central London and of course I was there.

Given the recent business with the legality of hypnosis being raised, and most people being a bit on edge, the atmosphere was more social than hypnotic for a little longer than usual to start with. Dr Chicken Royale, as I shall henceforth refer to him, and his rather significant unpopularity being one of the main topics of discussion.

Soon however we came back to our senses and we were zapping away as happily as we have always done. For me the highlights were coming back from the bar to find the way blocked by Ben sprawled on the floor having been used as a demonstration subject for a drop-back induction, Darren demonstrating to me how to do the Cerbone butterfly induction, and performing an Anthony Jacquin inspired "if you can unstick and grab the money you can keep it" routine. I also had fun performing an Erickson Handshake induction on Will.


What a wonderful bunch of people. Looking forward to next month!

Legal update

I have just heard from Chris that Westminster Council have decided that the 1952 Hypnotism Act also applies to private residences. This effectively means that they're saying all hypnosis everywhere is illegal unless the hypnotist has a license issued for that venue at that time.

As it happens I'm sat on the train heading into London now. I do not have a hypnosis licence for any of the locations I shall be visiting or travelling through so I shall endeavour to avoid all human interaction, lest I accidentally induce a trance and break the law.

In addition - 28/9/09

In one of their messages to Chris they paraphrase the Act somewhat stating.

"Section 2 of the 1952 Act states that no person shall give an exhibition, demonstration or performance of hypnotism on any living person... whether on payment or otherwise, at any place... unless the controlling authority have authorised that exhibition, demonstration or performance."

They emphasise that "at any place" is key.

I see this as a great example of somebody interpreting the world in such a way as to satisfy the criteria of their own existing reality; someone working for the council will want to try to regulate everything, lest private individuals be able to make decisions for themselves god forbid. Notice that the crucial line "at or in connection with an entertainment to which the public are admitted" is omitted from their statement.

Consider if we gave a similar treatment to a possibly better known directive, erring on the side of the dramatic in order to make a point.

"Thou shalt... kill thy neighbour"

Quite a significant change in meaning can be engendered by the removal of parts of a statement.

Just because I'm in a controversial mood, and it's interesting demonstrating how people will paraphrase statements to find what they want to see, let's consider another. This one is from the second amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Now notice how the way in which we might interpret the meaning of this changes somewhat in light of the, less well known, complete statement.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I'm not stating a political view on firearms control, just seeking to illustrate how two parties might see different meanings in a single statement.

The council clearly want to interpret the meaning of section 2 of the 1952 Hypnotism act as a requirement to regulate everything, and it is in doing so that they have opened up a huge can of worms for themselves. For example, without the qualification "in connection with an entertaiment" this also applies to hypnotherapy, should it be unsuccessful, and criminalises all hypnotherapists working in Westminster, including those on the payroll of the NHS.

It remains to be seen if, in light of this, Westminster Council will go back to their original sensible position, which was indeed that Section 2 only applies to hypnosis at or in connection with an entertainment to which the public are admitted.

Legal issues

The last couple of weeks, following the meet up in Covent Garden, have been a bit manic for the London Magic Mental and Hypnosis group, and to some extent this has included me and my own ambitions as an amateur hypnotist. The "Last Thursday Group", as our monthly HypnoMeets are now knows, has also been affected but to a lesser extent.

Following the meet up the week before last, which everybody enjoyed, including the members of the public that were hypnotised, questions were raised about the legality of what was going on. It turned out that much of this controversy was down to the actions of a hypnotist who goes by the name of Jonathan Royle and it was plain from the outset that although he hadn't been present he did not approve of what had gone on.

The particular issue which Royle raised was whether street hypnosis is legal under the 1952 Hypnotism Act, which is the law that regulates hypnosis for the purpose of entertainment in the UK. He insists that street hypnosis is illegal and that anybody who performs hypnosis on members of the public without a license is breaking the law.

As someone who knew little about Royle and thus previously had a neutral opinion of him I have to say that I have seen little about this individual over the last couple of weeks that endears him to me. A cursory glance at his blog may imply that his reasons for trying to discourage the LMMH meets are due to his concern for the safety of the public and for the good name of the profession of hypnosis. I'm not convinced of this however, and I believe that as one reads on the real motives for his trouble stirring become clear.

There's much about Royle's character that I find objectionable. To start with a lot of his blog post is centred around demeaning the work and character of other hypnotists for whom I have some respect, most notably Anthony Jacquin, Kev Sheldrake, Amit Badiani, and Vince Lynch. However despite being willing to publish such negative comments he has no reservations about sprinkling keywords such as "reality is plastic" all over his own work, presumably to bump up his hit rate. He also lectures the LMMH group about the morality and legality of performing street hypnosis, whilst at the same time anyone who visits his youtube channel can see him performing examples of exactly what he's railing against, indeed using significantly more violent and potentially dangerous methods.

In my opinion he is acting purely out of misguided self-interest. His self promotion is shameless and yet so far the only person I've heard saying that he's good is him. He's quite willing to try to leech off the popularity and work of others, rather than generate new and original content of his own that sells off its own merit. Indeed, despite his continuous torrent of self-affirmation, I don't think he can be said to regard his own work and expertise too highly if he feels that the only way to sell it is to try to kick down everybody else.

It did not surprise me to find out that he has spent time in prison for fraud.

Joe, on Uncommonforum, did some interesting webtrawling and found a couple of links regarding Royle (aka "Alex LeRoy" or "Alex Smith"), which make for interesting reading. Links here and here. He also indicates that a google search for "alex smith hypnosis jail" is also an education in itself. I like Joe, he's brilliant!

Unfortunately when it became clear that communications had been opened with Westminster council, who replied that they believed street hypnosis was not covered by the 1952 Act and thus would not require their approval, Royle made it his business to send a message to them to put his point across. Clearly spooked by his email, the council then did what authorities everywhere do when there is a speck of controversy and it's impossible to separate the good from the bad, which is to ban everything. Or at least try to; they have stated "no exhibition, performance or demonstration can take place" and threaten to fine anybody who does. Scary sounding stuff, but I'm not convinced they have the power to do that. As of tonight that is how things stand.

So on to the legal stuff.

Anybody who is interested can find the 1952 hypnotism act here. If you intend to perform hypnosis on the public in the UK I would encourage you to read through it, take some time to understand it and decide on your own position in relation to it.

Note that, whatever Royle may claim, there is no definitive interpretation of this document and nobody has ever been prosecuted under these laws in 57 years.

What follows is my interpretation. I think section 2 of the act is most relevant.

2 Control of demonstrations of hypnotism at other places

(1) No person shall give an exhibition, demonstration or performance of hypnotism on any living person at or in connection with an entertainment to which the public are admitted, whether on payment or otherwise, at any place in relation to which such a licence as is mentioned in section one of this Act is not in force unless the controlling authority have authorised that exhibition, demonstration or performance.

For me the crucial line here is "in connection with an entertainment to which the public are admitted". This is what satisfies me that I am acting within the law if I hypnotise a stranger in the street or even in a pub; I cannot see how either are examples of "an entertainment to which the public are admitted".

It is also my opinion that it would take much more than simply practicing hypnosis on the street to prompt the authorities to take action. No council is likely to want to bear the expense of being the test case; indeed not only would they would have to prove that what is essentially a conversation between two private citizens is "an entertainment to which the public are admitted", but they would also have to prove that it was for the purpose of entertainment, that hypnosis was actually intended, that hypnosis was actually taking place (how do you prove that?), that hypnosis actually exists (many people believe it doesn't) and indeed if it did exist that it wasn't "self-hypnosis", which is permitted under section 6, and as many hypnotists believe that all hypnosis is self-hypnosis this could be difficult.

This said however, the bottom line is that any interaction with the general public, whilst not to be shied away from, should be approached with due restraint and caution. Subjects should be treated with complete respect, and consideration should always be paid to their health and safety. The hypnotism act may be little known, tenuous and open to interpretation, but it is also in my opinion the least likely charge one would face, and quite frankly deserve, for bad conduct in any case. More likely offenses would be examples such as causing an obstruction, public order, assault, or sexual harassment, which frankly a sensible hypnotist is unlikely to be guilty of.

My personal conclusion is that as far as I am concerned street hypnosis is legal and that nobody is likely to care anyway unless you make a scene, assault someone, or make inappropriate sexual approaches, none of which are things that are in my character.

Strange new worlds

Chatting with Ben recently over MSN he mentioned one of Igor Ledochowski's exercises called "strange new worlds", which is supposed to help build trust between conscious and subconscious minds. The idea is to describe a scene or story out loud, but to talk too quickly to allow conscious consideration of what's being said.

I tried this exercise last night and the results were quite... interesting. I started from the point of a friend of mine who wants a 'cello, although many of us suspect that what he actually wants is a 'cellist. In mere minutes I had invented the concept of the Scandanavian ninja 'cellist elite. A ruthless band of blonde female mercenary musicians dressed in black skinsuits and highly agile on skis, their instruments slung across their backs. They had kidnapped my friend and, via a video link from their secret base on Svalbard, were demanding a ransom as they held a bow to his throat. Fear would hardly describe the expression on his face in this perilous situation.

I don't know what any of this says about my subconscious; it already has much to answer for. I am going to retain the movie rights for "Strings of fire and ice" though.

Saturday in Bristol

I seem to have had quite a busy week hypnosis wise, but then I can never get enough of it anyway.

Yesterday my mighty folding bike and I paid another visit to Bristol, which is a nice place and definitely worth a visit just to see the sights. I was, of course, there for another HypnoMeet that Rich had organised. Also attending were Javier, Lex & Liz, and Keiron, a magician and hypnotist Rich knows.

I had deliberately planned to arrive there early so I could have a bit of an explore on my bike and I passed a productive couple of hours on my own before the others arrived. I looked around the shops, had lunch, found an overdue Birthday present for someone, and miraculously managed to go into a bike shop without buying anything. Having learned my lesson from last time I wheeled my bike up Park Street this time, then I parked up and made myself comfortable in a bar to wait for the others.

Lex and Liz arrived soon afterward and after a quick drink we decided to make use of the two hours before anyone else was to show up to have a bit of a wander around the shops. Apparently there was some imperative for Liz to find an outfit for the following day. Having some vague idea of the kind of outfits that appeal to them I couldn't help but feel some apprehension, but as it turned out I needn't have worried.

Something that I should have known of course, and even my girlfriend would probably second this, is that with any outfit it's best to start with the hat and work downward. Of course I should have known that, how could I not have?!

Well anyway this became quite apparent to me that afternoon. As we passed one of those shops that will sell you plastic spiders, plastic swords, inflatable badgers, etc and of course a multitude of hats. Lex pointed this out, but Liz wasn't keen; she said she'd feel a bit self-conscious trying them on. This is where Lex demonstrated the fun that can be had with a girlfriend who can't get enough of being hypnotised. One moment we were walking up the road and the next, a few choice words later, we were making a quick u-turn and heading back to the shop.

The next 10 minutes or so were occupied by a rigorous process of hat selection. I personally was quite fond of the huge stovepipe hat for the Isembard Kingdom Brunel look, complete with LED-lit plastic cigar. It would have fit my character quite well, the crazed mechanical engineer that I am, but I didn't fancy riding home on my bike wearing it. After much deliberation Liz, admittedly in a rather more enthusiastic guise, selected a Tricorn hat. This was after going through a dozen or so other options and I'd been told off by a shop employee whose sole purpose in life seemed to be to stand in the corner and tell customers not to take pictures. I wasn't about to explain to him that the subject of the photographs was hypnotised, wouldn't remember this incident, and that was why photographic evidence was important. I put my phone away.

We were then just leaving the shop when Liz spotted a red hat in the window, one that it has to be said reminded me too much of Virgin Atlantic stewardesses, and so in we went again to buy one of those.

Then during our second attempt at leaving I found a metal enamel plate with a retro picture on it that I thought would be a great gift for my girlfriend, so we paused again whilst I bought it.

Walking away from the shop, and after a few more words from Lex, Liz was ever so slightly disoriented.

"Deja vu?" he asked her.

"Yeah..." she said "Hang on! Where did those bags come from?!"

"We've been shopping" Lex said.

What followed, as we walked further into the shopping district, was a spirited attempt by Liz to find out what was in the bags. We weren't telling of course, and a hypnotic forcefield kept her prying hands away. Lex must have decided that this was cruel, so after a while he let her carry the bags, but she was completely unable to open them.

The final revelation for Liz came when she was marching along through a clothes shop like a woman on a mission, trailing her male companions in what is the standard form for women in clothes shops, and spotted the Tricorn on her head as she passed a mirror. She had no idea how long it had been there, and of course she still doesn't.

We eventually found our way back to the Berkeley, the Wetherspoons pub that the last Bristol Meet had been in, to meet up with Rich and Javier. Rich met us at the bar, and after I'd bought a round without the aid of post hypnotic compulsion we found ourselves a quiet table in a corner. Rich, who had been learning magic, pulled out a deck of cards at this point and demonstrated a couple of near cards tricks. I was able to show off the Key trick I learned in Covent Garden on Wednesday. Lex took the opportunity to demonstrate the "strings cut" trigger he'd given Liz which turned her into a kind of human marrionette although sadly this wasn't accompanied by anybody's seat retracting into the floor or the table moving aside to allow a rocket to launch.

Javier produced a set of "salad" playing cards with NLP phrases on them, determined to get £30 worth of use out of them having spent that much buying them. Unfortunately these phrases proved completely ineffectual in helping him is his attempts to sell his jacket to Rich, presumably to try to make back the £30 deficit.

We elected to a Chinese restaurant up the road for dinner, and I enjoyed getting myself wrapped up in the world of discussing hypnosis in the way that one can around other people who share the same enthusiasm for it. The food at the restaurant was first rate, and the all the better for being an all you can eat buffet.

Over dinner I heard Rich asking Liz on the topic of who she would be happy going into trance for. As her answer made it clear that this would probably extend to him I could hear cogs turning in his head as he filed this information under "iiiiinteresting".

I contented myself with making Liz's spoon vanish from her hand just as she was diving into her ice cream desert and watching Lex get the blame for it.

Returning to the Berkeley we met up with Keiron, who is apparently new to the world of hypnosis but has a long history of practicing impromptu magic.

Rich was keen to try out a new magic trick on Liz, or at least it seemed so at first. He had her pick out a card from the deck, note to herself which one it was, then put the card back and shuffle the deck thoroughly. What he did next was a bit sneaky; he slammed his hand down flat on the table with a bang and said "sleep!". It was a shock induction of course; it certainly shocked me! Liz, however, is the kind of subject that people she trusts as hypnotists can't say certain words around in normal conversation, for example "blank", "freeze" or "sleep". When playing scrabble one must take care to speak of the "blank... unblank" tiles or "tiles with no letters on" lest the game grind to a halt as a result of her mind switching itself off, and it seems Lex has only been able to say the word "sleep" out of the corner of his mouth for the last two years. Suffice to say that her response to Rich's command was predictable and immediate.

Rich had her tell him what her card was, and then come back to the room not noticing anything had happened. Then, the mighty magician that he was, he amazed her by pulling it out of the deck.

I shall have to try that shock induction sometime, although like a lot of instant inductions it's one that the hypnotist has to be prepared for it not to work a lot of the time. Indeed, Rich told me that it works about 30% of the time.

I got in on the card action by also pointing out that her card was also on the top of the freshly shuffled deck, which it was after I'd frozen her and done a bit of re-arranging. She was also amazed when *all* of the cards were her card thanks to a few suggestions. Suffice to say that I felt like a bit of a dirty cheat for doing this and owned up straight away.

As with his earlier actual card tricks Liz demanded to know how he'd done it. Rich wasn't going to say and pushed straight on for the holy grail of hypnosis, the invisible hypnotist routine. He put her back into trance and told her that she wouldn't be able to see him, but she would be able to hear him and see anything he moved.

Imagine her confusion when, no sooner had we explained that Rich had gone looking for potential subjects, one of the pint glasses on the table started moving around on its own. In fact I don't think I've ever seen her quite so taken aback before, not even by the Harry Potter wall in Oxford. This was especially so when the levitating glass, toted by a very smug Rich, moved toward her. This time, as Lex wasn't around, I took the full blame for the levitating pint glass Liz was sure she was hallucinating.

Rich having "returned" decided it was time to get to work, and he Javier, and Keiron who had been looking on in a kind of stunned silence, started looking for tables to approach. They approached two or three, but nobody seemed particularly interested in hypnosis, not even the table of about 20 women all dressed in red skirts and white shirts, presumably on a social night out with a society of some kind. Keiron's magic went down a bit better, but the three of them still ended up returning to our table soon after they'd left.

I wasn't in the mood for approaching tables. I had taken a moment to demonstrate magnetic hands on Lex, who in spite of his insistence that he has a poor response to hypnosis responded very well to the suggestions. Had I thought at the time I might have tried to demonstrate a few more exercises on him, but is request rather caught me by surprise. I do wonder if he suffers frustration at being amongst the number of hypnotists who don't have any deep experience of hypnosis as the subject, not being able to achieve most of the effects he routinely engenders in others. It's a frustration I know well myself.

Indeed, I became aware that of the six of use around the table there were only two of use who could be considered tranceable, and this in mind I was happy when Keiron changed the subject and went into demonstrating some of his magic routines.

"Wow!" I said, impressed "That's much better than when when Rich cheated earlier."

I should have kept quiet, because this re-ignited Liz's attempts to find out just how Rich had managed to find her card earlier, and needless to say Rich wasn't giving anything away.

It was at this point I heard a quiet voice beside my right ear. "Veritas. Parkey, how did Rich do that magic trick?"

Now, earlier in the day the conversation had touched on the subject of truth triggers, and indeed Liz had given me one of these during a skype conversation about four months earlier. I find that post hypnotic suggestions are always strongest when they catch you by surprise, and I was completely astonished to hear myself saying "Rich tranced you and then..." ...and then I realised what I was saying and could only exclaim "NOOOO!!!"

"I can't believe I said that!" I gasped, feeling myself going red. "Why did I just say that?!"

Liz patted me on the shoulder, "it's called hypnosis dear."

Being a somnambulist and experiencing the full force profound hypnotic phenomena straight away must be quite an amazing experience, but for the likes of me the slow road to improvement as a subject is lined with tiny but significant milestones. I find that moments like this one, where something hypnotic almost unquestionably occurred, are exciting and very special.

What followed was an attempt by Javier to see if other people could use that trigger.

"Veritas. Parkey, is it 'Veritas' that makes you tell the truth?"

"NO!" I lied, and then having realised I'd gotten away with being able to lie, punched the air, "Yessss!".

Thus defying the whole purpose of lying I reminded myself.

Anyway the evening only went on a short while longer for me after that because I had a train to catch. Liz, fresh from her success triggering a confession for Rich out of me, proceeded to stick my hands to my drink, drink to the table, etc, although this "brattishness", as she would call it, was a little bit encouraged by a few choice words. The suggestions holding my hand to the table held for a long time before breaking, even when my ribs were under bombardment from various peoples' prodding fingers. The things I'm willing to endure for the sake of affirmation!

Around about 10pm we left the pub and I said my goodbyes, leaving the others as they headed off down the street in search of better hunting grounds, riding my bike back to the station to catch the last train home and ending another awesome evening out!

Oh, if anybody's interested in Richard Skeates' hypnosis course in Bristol on 26th October the details can be found here.

Covent Garden

A bit of a flurry of hypnosis activity this week, and it's set to continue as I shall be in Bristol on Saturday for another meet up. Yesterday I attended the Monthly Mental, Magic, and Hypnosis meet, or "MMM&H" meet in Covent Garden.

(This reminds me about the old joke about the companies 3M and Goodyear merging to form "MMMGood")

This meet was a lot of fun, and although I didn't quite feel in the mood to go forth and do some zapping myself I did meet a lot of new people, get zapped myself, and pick up lots of new tips.

Heading up through Covent Garden I didn't spot the group until I was practically on top of them. However, I soon spotted Darren and a few other faces I recognised stood out on the street. There were also plenty of new faces too, and it was great to be introduced to a few new people.


I have to say that the style of street hypnosis that was going on, whilst well received by the passing public, was a little more assertive than I have been comfortable in the past, where in fact most of the strangers I have hypnotised have actually asked me to do it. Here the group were approaching passers by and seeking to engage their interest, which in most cases wasn't difficult. I wasn't particularly in the mood for approaching people, so I was happy to just watch.

I learned a heck of a lot from just being there. James showed me how to do a magic trick with a key using "energy" to lift it up on ones hand. I was also wowed by some of the other magic tricks that were demonstrated by other members of the group. I really need to learn some magic!

Someone I met for the first time there was Vince Lynch, a hypnotist I'd heard a lot about. He offered to hypnotise me and I was happy to give it a try. I'm glad I did, because I got a lot out of it.

Vince's induction was quite interesting. He had me place my feet together, close my eyes and do magnetic hands, but this time imagine that my hands were being pushed apart instead. As my hands moved steadily away from each other and around my body he said that they'd reach a point where they couldn't go any further, and when they did I'd let them drop to my sides and go into hypnosis. Once I'd done that he did quite an interesting convincer, which was to imagine myself standing on a boat swaying backward and forward. This was why he'd had me put my feet together and of course it worked beautifully; I was soon swaying backward and forward.

Next Vince did some suggestions with me, such as getting my arms to raise up. I have to say this was the most convincing ideomotor experience I have ever had, my arms seeming to have a purpose of their own, and indeed Vince kept saying "no pretending". Soon enough he had me pretending to play air guitar and piano, my eyes thankfully still closed, the instruction seeming to bypass my mind and my hands obliging of their own accord. I count myself lucky he picked the two instruments I can actually play, as opposed to something crazy like a trombone, violin or timpani.

When he asked me to pretend to be a stripper I wasn't having any of it though, my eyes were open in an instant and I was pointing at him shouting "No! No way!".

"Interesting" he said.

I'm really grateful to Vince for that experience. I learned a lot from his techniques, and his manner and confidence of delivery.


Ben seems to have somehow transformed into some kind of people approaching machine. I felt a bit in awe at his recent loss of inhibitions over walking up to complete strangers, and diving into hypnosis routines, but then he has been going out during his lunch breaks to do it. I wish that my job offered me such opportunities.

I didn't stay too late, as I had been stood up all afternoon and had things to do at home, but this was a really good meetup and I met a lot of fun and interesting new people.

Water into port

The cost of buying drinks, especially good drinks, can sometimes be a bit prohibitive, but worry not because hypnosis is on hand to help!

Recently I was fortunate enough to do some hypnosis with a friend who informed me, quite unknowingly because she was in a trance at the time, that her favourite drink is port.

This kind of hypnotic interrogation is potentially a wonderfully sneaky way to get around the age old difficulty of deciding what to buy someone for their birthday or Christmas. Quite often people are able to give exactly the same answers to questions if they're awake, although trance does seem to lower inhibitions somewhat, but being able to ask questions when somebody is in trance does have other advantages. In particular being able to surprise somebody with something that they like or want always feels very rewarding for me. It's also useful in terms of being certain that what I am doing is agreeable to my subject, which I think is very important.

Anyway, now knowing my subject's beverage of choice I was able to provide a glass of said port. Or rather, a glass of water. Hallucination was able to do the rest, and it was very strange to watch somebody handling, sniffing and drinking from a small glass of water as though the liquid inside was a particularly fine vintage of port. The body language we associate with different drinks is so completely different, but of course we tend not to notice how much so.

As my friend later commented this would make for very cheap dates in restaurants; Champagne every night with Parkey! I did point out that it might be a bit strange to have Champagne served in a jug, but never mind.

Feeling very intoxicated after just a few sips is also quite possible, but with sobriety a finger's click away and forget ever having a hangover!

I love hypnosis!

Subjectivity

In a conversation with Ben recently he commented that after hypnotising an alternative therapist by chance during his lunch hour he had been invited to become a member of a alternative therapies centre.

I replied to this asking whether hypnotherapy really is an alternative therapy. Hypnotherapy can be shown to work, and isn't the reason why alternative therapies are called "alternative" that if they did actually work they'd just be called "therapy".

Ben has since commented that Wikipedia says that it is not an alternative medicine because it was considered a genuine state and therefore an "orthodox" therapy. It's interesting to consider though why hypnosis seems to fit into that "alternative" category in many peoples minds.

This subject came up after I recently watched a couple of documentaries by Professor Richard Dawkins looking at the rise of an "epidemic of superstition" in modern culture, especially in healthcare. It's called "Enemies of reason" and is available on Google Videos, YouTube and 4oD; well worth watching.

The irrationality of some of the beliefs that people will attach themselves to is quite an eye opener, especially when that belief appears to satisfy some emotional need they have. What becomes very worrying though is the thought that such individuals may go to an alternative therapist instead seeing a doctor.

A lot of this comes from the rise of relativism, which is arguably derived from our living in an increasingly socially liberal and multicultural society in recent decades. I believe both of these attributes to our culture are on the whole a good thing, but whilst allowing for tolerance of others one has to be very careful not to let relativism to stray into the realm of what should always be considered objective.

Relativism should allow for an appreciation and respect of other people's subjective experiences of the world, which will by definition be different from those of others. If for example someone were to tell me that they thought red was nicer to look at than blue, or that fries taste better with salt on them, I would not be in a reasonable position to decry that assertion as wrong, because it is a subjective one. That statement is true for them, but not necessarily for anyone else.

The danger with relativism comes when people who merely have a subjective belief in something conclude that their assertion is of equal weight to a position based on objective evidence from peer-reviewed work done by scientists. One cannot take objective scientific fact and simply say "that's true for you, but not for me". It doesn't matter what you believe; the ball will fall if I drop it, all life on earth did evolve from single celled organisms, the universe is billions of years old.

I heard Richard Dawkins refer to relativism in a lecture he gave at Harvard University in 2003 in what I think is a fantastic quotable line:

"[I shall not] lose any time on fashionable claims that science is just the western patriarchal dead white male view of truth. Science works. That is why, when you go to an international conference on cultural relativism, you go by Boeing 747 rather than magic carpet."

This point is extremely important and should not be understated. Science is concerned with the objective nature of the universe that can be measured in experiments that can be re-produced and demonstrated to others. It is most definitely not on a par with assertions based upon subjective experiences; any hypnotist reading this will know just how crazy and irrational those can be, especially after a few choice words.

Indeed, whilst I do have a great deal of respect for Richard Dawkins and agree with him on the vast majority of the material his commentary covers, probably because I have firm grounding in science and the scientific method in my chosen calling in life as an engineer, I do perhaps diverge a little as a consequence what I understand about hypnosis. I think that whilst it is important to try to prevent subjective assertions from undermining scientific fact it is also important not to underestimate the importance of subjective experiences and perception - not least because 100% of the universe yet perceived by humans has been done so in this way.

Watching that documentary through the eyes of a hypnotist, as opposed to the more objective position that I used to occupy, brings up some interesting thoughts. For example there is quite an amusing scene where Dawkins is sat in a room full of people who are sat with their eyes closed calling out a mystical chant and looking quite absorbed in it all.

A year ago I would have laughed and dismissed what those people were doing as silly, ridiculous, and wonder what on earth they were hoping to achieve because it was plain to see that nothing was happening. That was, however, before the word "somnambulist" had entered my vocabulary. Now I can look at those people as they quite obviously put themselves into a trance and know that there almost certainly is something going on and that they are probably really experiencing something, although of course nothing supernatural.

Give me a sufficiently suggestible individual right now and I could sit them down somewhere comfortable, perhaps get them to stare at a candle, have them relax, and within minutes I could have them experiencing practically anything they could imagine, and especially if they came to me with the expectation of having that experience. I would know the what it was I was doing, the spiritualists who do it may not, but either way the effect of hypnotic suggestion is just as real and just as profound to the person experiencing it.

I doubt that Richard Dawkins would be a good hypnotic subject, as I suspect he would suffer from much the same critical faculty problems I seem to have.

One part of the documentary that I found particularly interesting was the part about a double blind experiment to see whether dowsers, through the use of divining rods, really could detect the presence of water. I was once given a set of divining rods as a present when I was about 10 year old and spent an afternoon playing with them in my parents back gardern. I was amazed by the way in which, sure enough, if held parallel they would cross over if held over water.

A plausible scientific explanation for a dowser's ability to find water is that through their natural senses they become aware of the location of water, maybe only subconsciously, and that this manifests itself through the ideomotor effect causing the divining rods to move at the right time. My 10 year old self soon surmised this much of course, mostly because I couldn't understand any scientific reason why the rods would move. The wonderful word "ideomotor" eluded me for many years afterward, but I understood the concept at least.

If, however, my upbringing hadn't encouraged me to question why things worked in the way they did I might have been like the dowsers in the program, trying to find reasons why my rods had suddenly stopped working in a controlled scientific experiment. As, I might add, all paranormal phenomena somehow seems to do.

Suggestions put to the subconscious mind and the belief systems that those build up are very important because they shape the way in which an individual perceives the world. For example there seems to be a tendency for the human mind to interpret information in such a way as to fit with existing models and beliefs. This is something that a hypnotist can take advantage of; when they, say, tell a subject that their hand is stuck to the table the subject will take it as read that their hand will not move and then interpret the evidence from their senses in such a way as to build their interpretation of reality around the initial premise.

This tendency not to stop and re-consider a deeply held personal belief can, however, lead to potentially frustrating disagreements between highly idealistic individuals. For example I once came across someone who, presumably as a response to environmentalists telling him that his lifestyle of commuting 30,000 miles a year in his car might not be particularly agreeable to them, had convinced himself in a kind of polarity response that cars could do no wrong in the world. His ability to interpret any evidence presented to him in such a way as to confirm his own position was in the right (at least to himself) had turned him into a legend on the local news website on which he posted.

For example he once insisted that a cyclist will produce more CO2 per mile travelled than a motorist in a car because a cyclist would be breathing hard whilst a motorist would be resting. I find it hard to imagine anyone else, regardless of their views on climate change politics, agreeing with that statement.

He went on though. When challenged about the car's engine he would argue it was modern and thus very efficient. When asked about fossil carbon and how it doesn't generally feature in the diet of cyclists he would argue that the vegetarian cyclist's green beans had obviously been flown across the world and thus the cyclist would have the food miles to answer for. Asked about where the petrol for the car was sourced from and how it got to the pump he would have none of it. No rational evidence would shift this individual from his position. He genuinely believed in the validity of his own argument and his subconscious was there loyally shaping all the information entering his mind into a form that would support it.

In fact I'm not sure if there is any way such individuals can ever be brought to re-consider a personal dogma; they are perhaps too far gone. It serves as a strong example to me of the power of belief and its influence on the critical faculty of the mind.

Becoming a hypnotist has given me a much better understanding of something that science never could explain to me, and that is the importance of the subjectivity. Humans are by their very nature irrational beings and it's hard to understand why so many people act in the way they do without taking a moment to consider the world from their perspective. Irrational beliefs and ideas may have no foundation in science, but they can manifest themselves physically in the world we live in.

For example the power of suggestion to affect an individuals health is a well established in scientific fact. There are very few people who have not heard of the placebo effect. There is no doubt that if someone believes that, say, taking a sugar pill will improve their health this will have a positive effect. Similarly personal morale is a very important factor in terms of keeping good health. I once heard Kev Sheldrake, a regular contributor to UncommonForum make an interesting comment about placebos. He said words to the effect that a placebo was just a suggestion, and that the suggestion will work without the pill, but the pill won't work without the suggestion.

Suggestion is, of course, responsible for the majority of the positive effects that alternative medicine is able to convey. There are other effects too such as regression toward the mean and cognitive bias which also play their part in building belief systems. Creating mystical fairy tales or pseudo-science with no basis in fact is, sadly, centre stage to creating these suggestions.

Something that I like about hypnosis is the way in which it uses the same mechanisms as a lot of the mumbo jumbo that's out there, but it isn't under any illusions that it's something mystical or beyond the reach of science. The way hypnosis actually works is probably as difficult to understand as human consciousness, but it seems to me that hypnosis does stand up to scientific scrutiny. It is real, and it works.

Perhaps hypnosis only works because people believe that it does, or perhaps that is just part of it and there is much more to it than that. Either way most hypnotists aren't making up nonsense about Chi Meridians or Emerald Spirits; they don't need to.

Directions and goals

Sometimes I wonder where I should be going with this interest of mine, especially when I consider the apparent progress being made by others who got into this around the same time I did.

For example Darren Altman, as a performer and a good one at that, seems almost destined to become a stage hypnotist, amongst his other talents (you heard the idle speculation here first!). Likewise Ben White is moving in the direction of performing professional hypnotherapy and has already had his first paying client. Both are brilliant to watch in action and seem to be taking their respective hypnosis talent and going somewhere with it.

From the beginning for me this was not going to be a serious endeavour in terms of being something I would want to do professionally. I love my day job far too much to ever consider giving it up, and besides I have other activities that take up a lot of my spare time. This was only ever going to be a hobby for me.

That doesn't mean that I haven't had the feeling recently that I've lost a lot of the momentum I once had, and that I really should be going out and getting a lot more inductions under my belt. I should also have some kind of goal to aim for or else at the very least this blog will become very boring.

I think ultimately the next step for me must be to get out and start hypnotising people in Oxford, for which I should probably look into local laws regarding street performers and sort out public liability insurance. To be honest I still feel that I would be much happier doing street hypnosis if I had an accomplice, even if it was just someone with a camera to film it.

Ho humm... one for me to muse about for a bit.