UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Apr > Apr 14

Re: Regression Hypnosis: Should Ufology Take A

From: Mark Cashman <mcashman@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:00:10 -0400
Fwd Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:13:57 -0400
Subject: Re: Regression Hypnosis: Should Ufology Take A


>From: Jenny Randles <nufon@currantbun.com>
>To: UFO UpDates - updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Regression Hypnosis: Should Ufology Take A Stand?
>Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 16:17:28 +0100

>As a newcomer to the net, please excuse me if I do not follow
>proper etiquette. I am still learning.

Hi, Jenny! Welcome to the list. This is an excellent post and
you have nothing to worry about.

>But I wanted to issue a
>comment on a major policy in force in the UK, which does not
>seem to have been adopted by any other country in the world
>(save, to some extent, parts of Scandinavia). That is the
>banning of the use of regression hypnosis as a viable way to
>explore alleged abductions.

I have always been in favor of this, and I have, on occasion,
mentioned my agreement with the BUFORA policy and my admiration
for BUFORA having taken this stand. I also state to any abductee
or possible abductee who speaks to me, whether they ask or not,
that I recommend against the use of hypnosis, do recommend they
see a conventional therapist, and if they do decide to undergo
hypnosis that they do so under the care of a therapist.

I am basically wary of using a poorly understood technique that
induces a poorly understood mental state as a way of studying an
unknown phenomenon. Aren't things hard enough without it?

I am even more wary, since hypnosis' original claim to fame was
post-hypnotic suggestion. I find it difficult to appreciate the
certaintly with which investigators assert that they have found
techniques which prevent suggestibility from being a problem.

Your point about the need for testing hypnotic recall against
confirmable events is especially well taken.

But you are right - as Dr. Jacobs has stated, the technique is
viewed as the only way to get "inside" the objects. I fear the
temptation to do so is too great, and has not been resisted,
despite the dangers.

I believe that there is some understanding of this issue among
the more sophisticated investigators of such material, but,
nevertheless, it is not of paramount importance to them.

I am also concerned that problems with hypnosis may be the
reason for the current boom in abductions (Jacobs claims that
one abductee was taken 54 times in 8 months) and claims that
UFOs must be able to become invisible (broached by Hopkins at
the IF conference). If so, the abduction data base may well be
being rapidly contaminated with spurious events.

And, naturally, one must be primarily concerned about the
results for the abductee of having false experiences made part
of their lives.

I hope everyone will think carefully about what you've said
here.

------
Mark Cashman, creator of The Temporal Doorway at
http://www.temporaldoorway.com
- Original digital art, writing, and UFO research -

UFO cases, analysis, classification systems, and more...
http://www.temporaldoorway.com/ufo/index.htm
------


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com