Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Editorials & Other Articles

longship

(40,416 posts)

4. Okay, you're correct

Reply to leveymg (Reply #3)

Wed Mar 7, 2012, 08:50 AM

Mar 2012

But neuroscience is a messy business because the brain is an extremely complex system. I think we can both agree that "stage hypnotism" is mere entertainment, not science. Furthermore, all the attributes of hypnotism in pop culture have been falsified. There is no "trance" in hypnotism. And therapeutic hypnotism has been shown to be dodgy at best.

It seems like many people believe the Hollywood version of hypnotism ("Afghanistan Banananistan&quot . It's fun in a movie, like the Star Trek warp drive. But it isn't real.

But don't believe me. Look it up for yourself.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Aldous Huxley's Letter to George Orwell [View all] Ichingcarpenter Mar 2012 OP

++Orwell and Huxley were both right - the proles get the boot,the Outer Party have video and soma leveymg Mar 2012 #1

But hypnotism is demonstrable bunk longship Mar 2012 #2

The "hypnotic effect" of staring at moving images on video screens is real & demonstrated by science leveymg Mar 2012 #3

Okay, you're correct longship Mar 2012 #4

I think we agree. The point is that Huxley got it right that people would be doped, distracted, leveymg Mar 2012 #5

I am with you --- 100%. eom longship Mar 2012 #6

++ Good! - NT Newest Reality Mar 2012 #7

++ Thanks! leveymg Mar 2012 #8

I think that we're further away from BNW and 1984 than when they were written muriel_volestrangler Mar 2012 #14

Smart kings figured out long ago that tolerating (some) public display of dissent creates loyalty leveymg Mar 2012 #24

doubleplusgood The Stranger Mar 2012 #15

Check out, if you haven't, a BBC documentary series called "Century of the Self" deutsey Mar 2012 #22

correct IMO lunasun Mar 2012 #26

I don't know... UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2012 #10

Hmmm longship Mar 2012 #11

I'm very cynical and not one to believe in woo of any kind. UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2012 #12

Please don't be cynical longship Mar 2012 #16

Here's one you'll like. UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2012 #19

Randi is the real deal longship Mar 2012 #20

He's great. UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2012 #21

Even a well known skeptic as Richard Feynman usrname Mar 2012 #23

You would be surprised. zeemike Mar 2012 #27

Find a copy of Marat/Sade somewhere and watch it Recursion Mar 2012 #9

I think this is why psychotropic drugs are illegal such as LSD, Pot , Mescaline... etc Ichingcarpenter Mar 2012 #13

the onion boiled it down to humans looking at rectangles. pansypoo53219 Mar 2012 #17

The fnords! The fnords! I can see the fnords! malthaussen Mar 2012 #18

Dystopian sci-fi is a reaction to the author's own world. McCamy Taylor Mar 2012 #25