Comment by rantanplan | Hacker News Reader

Comment by rantanplan | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

First of all, thanks for the links. I admit I didn't read the 147-page pdf, but I think we can classify it with all the rest, at the same level of "evidence".

As far as I can see there's nothing new here, other than the usual super-secret 3-letter agency experiments, full of material for great spy movies but thin on substance or evidence. I think you'd agree that the same quality of evidence is abundant for aliens, area 51 and all that.

>I believe that counts as doing something against ones will.

Um nope :)

Hypnotize someone and instruct them to do some kind of self-harm. Jump off a roof. Shoot themselves or whatnot. It won't happen :D

So maybe I wasn't clear earlier. I am aligned with the scientific consensus at this point. And that, at the moment, is that this is hocus-pocus, placebo effect and the usual trait of humans that they need an excuse to justify actions that would usually never do. You know, kinda like "oh no, the alcohol did it!"

Maybe we'll have stronger evidence in the future, but right now it's all smoke. Nevertheless, interesting.

cheers

Thanks for the reply.

People can certainly be compelled to do things they would not otherwise do by what people would ordinarily call hypnosis. The focus on harm brings MK ULTRA to mind. However, a more generic definition is widely documented in the medical literature, see e.g.

The Prefrontal Cortex and Suggestion: Hypnosis vs. Placebo Effects. <http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00...

Self-harm may not be possible, as you say. Given the the nature of hypnotic suggestion, I speculate it is possible to suggest a separation of the physical self from the harm, and in that way trick someone into self harm. Particularly when combined with mind-altering drugs like LSD. But I've no evidence other than the reports linked.

The MK ULTRA report was read into evidence at Senate hearings because the truth of the report indicated abominable and deplorable practices. Nobody has, in spite of powerful incentives to do so, denied the truth of these reports. That ought to be a compelling indicator, IMHO.

Though I did not see an article discussing harm, dozens of articles on PubMed describe the effects of hypnosis (versus placebo).

I feel like your standard may be practically unattainable, meaning one must ask: What sort of evidence would convince you?

Yeah I forgot to address the LSD part that I saw in the links you gave me.

So all bets(and my opinions) are off, when LSD enters the game :)

I was only discussing pure hypnosis, so I can concede whatever you want if you put LSD into the discussion.

My standards are a bit high, but not unattainable. In general, I stick to what is the current scientific consensus. I appreciate any research in all directions, but until that research produces tangible and specific results, I'll abstain.

Mostly because I've seen what happens when people run wild with their assumptions and imagination. e.g. homeopathy, various other medical conditions(leaky gut syndrome) and other less worrying stuff, like aliens or super-secret technology.

Add on top of it various funny facts, like that CIA has also experimented with telekinesis, telepathy, etc and all kind of crazy loony-baloney that, of course, resulted to nothing, and you've got an explanation about my strong stance against extraordinary claims.

Also keep in mind, just at the back of you head, that no government agency that sunk gazillions of dollars into crazy shit, would like to admit that it was all for nothing. Ain't saying that it's all fabrication, but if it were... it wouldn't be the first time. Better to get caught doing "despicable" acts, rather than spending tax dollars that amounted to nothing. And of course, don't forget that you must terrify your enemies.

My 2 cents, and I'm off for now. See you later.

Good explanation, thanks. :)

Cheers

Reply on news.ycombinator.com