There is a very spurious document making its rounds right now in the various hypnosis forums right now that purports to be an examination of Barack Obama’s use of hidden covert manipulative hypnosis techniques in his speeches by making a number of specious leaps (here).
As to actual content of the document and the idea of hidden hypnosis, I have no patience for the growing argument that anything that influences folks should be considered some form of hypnosis (often applied to discussion of communication events by those particular authors disagree with) or that using effective rhetorical strategies with purpose is inherently unscrupulous or manipulation. We seem to be going in a direction of defining hypnosis so broadly that it no longer becomes useful to discuss it as there becomes no real difference between "hypnosis" and "rhetoric" and "influence" and "persuasion" and "communication" . . . in our attempt to codify and explain hypnosis and to get it out of the realm of the watch waving we have begun to overdilute it. Yes, influence is important . . . yes, communication is important . . . and these are certainly areas that make us better hypnotists if we understand influence and are better communicators . . . but influence alone is not hypnosis . . . communication and rhetoric alone are not hypnosis . . . even "trance" alone is NOT hypnosis.
One commenter on the Obama hypnosis document in the Hypnosis Technique Exchange discussion made the following statement:
What public speaker doesn’t use oratorical techniques? They’ve been around for centuries, only now we are in the frame where they have to be Ericksonian, but Uncle Milty didn’t invent this stuff – he found it already running in humans.
Indeed.
I have been teaching communication at university for over two decades and I often begin the very first day of my classes each year with a bit from Marcus Fabius Quintilianus (aka, Quintilian) who is considered by many to be one of the cornerstone thinkers of Western rhetorical studies (what we used to call "communication" before the latter became more fashionable) who created a thorough and detailed system for developing the "orator" (which we now would consider the "public speaker" or the "communicator").
Quintilian objected to the belief that communication should be considered "persuasion" as there are so many different ways to influence and persuade folks (he noted that money is a very quick and effective way to get people to do what you want them to do).
Rather, to Quintilian, the true essence of rhetoric, communication, is "a good man speaking well" . . . the tricks of the trade of a good communicator are not merely tools of manipulation . . . although they certainly can be used that way by unscrupulous persons. When I teach students at the university Robert Cialdini’s various laws of social influence, I do so with that signpost from Quintilian . . . any good communicator should learn this stuff and then use the techniques in resonance with their own strong moral guide, should learn to influence and to more effectively get their message across (public speaking courses across the world have included the Monroe Activation Sequence for many many years – it was taught to me when I was an undergraduate and I taught it when I began teaching public speaking courses at university – because it is an effective way to structure a persuasive speech and no one has any ethical issue with including the visualization step which so obviously is related to the hypnotic operator . . . no one has issue with it because the technique itself is not the ethical question . . . as long as we are "good men speaking well" then it is being used appropriately).
Of course, Obama is using effective speaking techniques . . . McCain likewise has speech writers who endeavor to craft words for him that increase his effectiveness at swaying public opinion (the recent appeals to fear and guilt by association are just such rhetorical strategies). If Obama were not using effective rhetorical devices, that would be the shocker.
Whether or not Obama is indeed a "good man speaking well" . . . well, that’s a different question. I have a strong sese that Obama IS such a man . . . with a message that is resonant with many of my own beliefs. I also believe that McCain is for the most part a good person who believes in his message . . . a message I disagree with on so many fundamental levels.
Honestly, I wouldn’t normally even go to a site like Penny Press Las Vegas (the hosts of the Obama Hypnosis file) which I would consider well on the ultraconservative side as my personal beliefs and politics are well on the other side of the spectrum. I found the so-called analysis to be offensive, particularly the nonsensical "EXPOSING OBAMA’S DECEPTION MAY BE THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT DEMOCRACY" at the bottom of every page which shows the agenda of the document which in and of itself is a negative suggestion that the writer and publisher hopes will sink into the reader’s unconscious simply through the repetition and the softening up of the main text itself . . . as if there isn’t plenty of mudslinging and spurious statements coming from the other side of the aisle in this particular election. The "analysis" LOOKS detailed to those with a superficial knowledge of the material BUT it jumps to a LOT of conclusions and uses a number of those so-called "evil" techniques in its own right. Dressing the document with "footnotes" is all well and good except that the material is being used in away to that is out of context or at least as dressing to lead readers into conclusions that are well more than giant leaps.
The various hypnosis forums really aren’t the appropriate place for the Obama criticism (or McCain bashing for that matter). For instance, the Hypnosis Technique Exchange is a large list with folks with many different views from many different countries. While the US presidential elections are extremely important to many in the world at large, most here are not interested in getting sucked into a political flamewar. One reason the list works is that folks are allowed some degree of tolerance and are encouraged to enjoy their own beliefs and modalities. One problem with politically charged debates – particularly when they are colored with the "ethics" argument – is that they inherently end up with an us versus them mentality that can be damaging to one’s good relations in other contexts. We’re all here to discuss hypnosis and related modalities. While the political debate is important, it is specifically appropriate in other forums – for instance, most folks who read my blog regularly have a pretty good idea as to what my political leanings are.
All the best,
Brian
COMPREHENSIVE CORE SKILLS HYPNOSIS DVDs
http://www.briandavidphillips.net/store
Upcoming Shows
:
HYPNOHOT: Risque Hypnosis
Comedy Club, Taipei, Taiwan (25 Oct. 2008, 10pm)
HYPNOKOOL: Comedy Hypnosis
Comedy Club, Taipei, Taiwan (25 Oct. 2008, 8pm)
:
Course Sign Up NOW!
:
TAROT INTUITIVE
Taipei, Taiwan (7 December 2008)
PSYCHIC HYPNOSIS
b e p s y c h i c
Taipei, Taiwan (10-11 January 2009)
SPEED HYPNOSIS TECHNIQUES
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (21-22 February 2009)
See http://www.BrianDavidPhillips.com for details!
Brian David Phillips, PhD, CH [brian@briandavidphillips.com]
Hypnotist, Hypnotherapist, Intuitionist, Trance Wizard
President, Society of Experiential Trance
Associate Professor, NCCU, Taipei, Taiwan
http://www.BrianDavidPhillips.com
