Hello Pierre,

Thank you, I am aware of some of what is presented by the authors you recommend – evidence of us processing unconsciously is not evidence that we have “an unconscious mind” – I concur that we do much unconsciously, but there is no really evidence to suggest that we have a centre of consciousness in the way that is presented by many hypnotherapists.

Nobel award winning psychologist Daniel Kahnemann makes similar points that we have systems of cognitive funations, one that is beneath conscious awareness – again, I do not dispute this.

I dispute that there is a nominalised, objectified “thing” that is an unconscious mind and that is somehow a benevolent, all-wise, all-seeing force for good residing within us. As is characterised by many hypnotherapists. There is no evidence to support this premise.

And yes, I am often confronted with the notions that we are living an illusion, and that we lack free will because what we are doing this exact second was decided upon within our brain 10-20 seconds ago and science proves this to be true too.

However, what on earth any of this has to do with hypnosis, hypnotherapy and my field is beyond me. I am no neuroscientist and do not profess to be so. As a hypnotherapist and hypnosis lecturer, I simply dispute that most of this premise and related ideas and contest greatly what they actually have to do with hypnosis – very little in reality 🙂

Thank you for taking the time to write this, it is greatly appreciated. Best wishes, Adam.

Hello Taufiq,

We can and do may things automatically and without thought. We are able to do many things without thinking about doing them – yes, we do many things unconsciously. These are actions and processes that we are doing beneath awareness. This is not being disputed.

I dispute that there is such a thing as “an unconscious mind” – a thing which is at the centre of it all doing all of these things for us. I dispute that it is a “thing” that has characteristics and is some kind of all-wise, all-seeing benevolent force within us. I dispute that nominalising or objectifying and creating a mythical unconscious mind. There is no evidence to support this.

Additionally, even if there were such a thing, what does this have to do with hypnosis? Bo academics or researchers or neuroscientists ever refer to an unconscious mind to explain hypnosis or the way the mind works.

With regards to Freud – his theories are just that – theories. They are greatly questioned. As far back as the early 1960s, researchers such as Hans Eysenck offered up a great critique of Freud’s explanation of mind and the way his therapy worked and today, most credible authors I have encountered tend to regard his work and contribution as pseudoscientific.

Go research it for yourself, you’ll come up with the same answers when you do so 🙂

With my very best wishes to you,

Adam

I want to ask.
if the unconscious mind does not exist, is positive affirmation have any scientific prove?
And
If unconscious does not exist then why we can breath without consciousness and why our heart still can pump our blood without our will?

Is that mean, that sigmund freud theory about unconscious mind is wrong?

Thankyou adam.

Hello Deborah,

Firstly, thank you for taking the time to respond as you have done.

Re: For example, fact: James Braid said something but he was not the “creator of our field”. Hypnosis was being used back in the days of Ancient Egypt and beyond, in any case, long before James Braid was born, although it was called by a different name.

I think many would consider what was being done in Ancient Egypt and subsequently right up to Mesmerism to be ‘historical precursors’ rather than full blown hypnosis as we know it today. I do not think they were doing hypnosis per sé. Dream temples, chanting, Mesmeric states are some way away from the hypnosis that Braid researched and concluded as the art and science of suggestion. He coined the term hypnosis, an adaption of the word neurypnology as it originally was. I think it therefore makes sense for me to refer to him as the creator of the field of hypnotism. However, I’d happily refer to him as the ‘Father of modern hypnotism’ instead 🙂

I suspect that much of what we’d subsequently discuss here would also come down to the way in which we conceptualise hypnosis. I for one do not explain it in terms of being an altered state of consciousness, neither did Braid, and neither do the vast majority of researchers and academics who have explored this field.

Re: In any case, just because someone is considered by many to be an expert doesn’t mean everything they say is true, nor that they know everything about the subject.

I agree. I agree absolutely, though I have not once suggested that anyone “knows everything” about this subject. On the contrary, I doubt I will ever come close to knowing everything about this field and continue to happily research it, write about it and mine it – all of which I’ll be happy doing for the remainder of my days. I do love this field.

Re: And as for being the creator of the field, even if it were James Braid, usually the “creator of the field” knows less than the ones who follow.

Again I agree, however, the field of hypnosis is famous for having a huge amount of myth and misconception spread about it and many still explain hypnosis in ways that are a far cry from what Braid had intended. In fact, I think there are a great many frontline hypnotherapists who still today proliferate much myth and misinformation about the field and who are wholly ignorant of the depth and breadth of evidence and research we have, evidence that I think Braid would be pleased about.

Re: I personally believe that the unconscious mind is not located in the body at all so it is very much separate from the biological “brain” and I believe my idea, that it is non-physical,

You have stated that you ‘believe’ this. I think the field of hypnosis would benefit greatly, really greatly, if we were to separate beliefs from facts. Or in the absence of full scientific facts, that we at least attempt to separate our beliefs from what the best evidence would suggest. Believing something does not make it true, that is ‘critical thinking 101.’

Re: yet still explains why PET scans can light up in hypnotic states even though it’s a non-physical unconsciousness causing it to light up, but this would be a whole new article to explain why,

I’d love to read such an article and would love to read the sources supporting this theory. Some of what you say here does fly in the face of what many neuroscientists have demonstrated, so again, I’d love to read any article that disproves that and will happily yield in the face of strong evidence that favours what you have written here.

I do appreciate the analogies you have given in your reply, but I think they are non sequitur and I am not sure if they are wholly relevant. So I have not responded directly to them. You are right, the article is a tad jumbled, and was not really attempting to be exhaustive on the topic or to give a full on answer to the questions it poses, it was meant as stimulus, especially when so many hypnotherapists believe in the notion of an unconscious mind.

I’d also add that I do not think hypnosis is really anything to do with consciousness or altered states of consciousness, I am well known for having a leaning towards a sociocognitive explanation towards hypnosis, where it is a cognitive skill set, and not really anything to do with intangible ‘trance states.’ That said, I’ll repeat myself, I am not attempting to be ‘right’ or ‘correct’ and will always yield in the face of better evidence that supersedes where I am at or what I have researched myself prior to now.

Heck, this is a contentious issue, mainly because so many hypnotherapists are so invested in the idea of an unconscious mind – their training told them this and they have explained hypnosis this way for a long time. This type of theme that I wrote about here (some years ago now, I hasten to add) tends to ruffle feathers as a result. Some of the points you have made here do run the risk of promoting much of the myth and misconception that plagues our field.

Finally, just because people do not agree on points, does not mean they cannot be friends. This goes for the entire hypnosis field. As I wrote earlier, I really appreciate you taking the time to write and share your thoughts which I respect greatly, I send you my very best wishes, Adam.

Hello Kasper,

There is a big difference between ‘doing things unconsciously’ and having something called ‘an unconscious mind’ with it’s benevolence, ultimate wisdom and it’s own set of characteristics. Just because we do things unconsciously, or out of awareness, this does not mean that we have an unconscious mind.

If you want to discuss it further: http://www.adamshypnosishub.com/topic/35/is-there-an-unconscious-mind

Best wishes to you too, Adam.

Hello ‘Cosmos’ – thank you for taking the time to add your thoughts on this subject. I’ll level with you here – I don’t really understand what you have written here so am struggling to debate or further the discussion with you. Stating “yes it does exist” and then following up with notions of “it has been called” – who is calling it these things? Is there any evidence to support the notions you present? Why would you take the time to write this on my blog but then state “I do not wish to give these metaphysical keys away”? … And with regards to your comment “with these key words you are invited to discover the source alluded to” – I simply do not understand what that actually means.

I’d love to discuss it, I value and welcome everyone’s contribution and am very open to learning more myself; I just need something a bit more substantial and substantiating from you. In the meantime, I send you my very best wishes, Adam.