Hypnotism made plain
Date: 2026-02-13T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Hypnotism

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Hypnotism made plain

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Hypnotism made plain

Author: Maynard Shipley

Editor: E. Haldeman-Julius

Release date: February 13, 2026 [eBook #77928]

Language: English

Original publication: Girard: Haldeman-Julius Company, 1924

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/77928

Credits: Tim Miller, toy9683 and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HYPNOTISM MADE PLAIN ***

LITTLE BLUE BOOK NO. 92

Edited by E. Haldeman-Julius

Hypnotism Made
Plain

Maynard Shipley

HALDEMAN-JULIUS COMPANY

GIRARD, KANSAS

Copyright, 1924

Haldeman-Julius Company

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

HYPNOTISM MADE PLAIN

CONTENTS

| Page

Introduction

5

Chapter 1. A Retrospect | 7
Chapter 2. Modern Hypnotic Methods | 20
Chapter 3. Phenomena of Hypnotism | 31
Chapter 4. Hypnotism and Psycho-Analysis | 43
Chapter 5. Suggestion and the Masses | 50
Chapter 6. Hypnotism and Personality | 57

INTRODUCTION

To many persons mention of the word “hypnotism” at once brings to mind a “Professor” in full-dress suit on a vaudeville stage putting “subjects” through laugh-provoking antics. Or the image of Svengali rises before the mind’s eyes, with long, lank fingers making mystic “passes” before the now helpless—not to say enslaved—victim, fascinated by the large, black, “sorcerer” eyes of the great master.

To such persons the “hypnotist” is rather closely identified with the “charlatan.” Happily, this conception of hypnotists and hypnotism is fading out in the strong, clear light of modern science.

Hypnotism and Suggestion (two phases of the same phenomenon) have now taken their legitimate places in psychology and medicine as subjects intimately related to our everyday life, in health and in disease. Whether we know it or not, Suggestion is at work all around and within us, day and night, from earliest childhood to the very close of our lives.

Hypnotism and suggestion have—against strong opposition—won an important place in the history of medicine. It has been amply demonstrated that certain maladies which have stubbornly resisted the regular medical treatment often yield to psycho-therapeutic methods (mind treatment). The time has long since passed when medical science scoffed at the idea of alleviating or entirely removing pain and certain pathological conditions by suggestion in mild cases and hypnotism in more stubborn, deep-seated afflictions.

What is the “Applied Psychology” about which we hear so much nowadays, but the application of the established principles of suggestion to the problems of social life and the affairs of prosaic business? Applied psychology—for a course of ten lessons for which enterprising “leaders of thought” are charging $100—is nothing more or less than hypnotism and suggestion “made plain.” Investigation will readily show that the principles of suggestion are applicable to the affairs of business and social life. But hypnosis and suggestion may also play a sinister part in intellectual, social and political life, and need to be understood as a matter of self-protection.

From what has been said—and I shall adduce abundant proofs in succeeding pages in support of the statements made above—it may be seen that to give a little time and study to the elementary principles of hypnotism and suggestion is not merely a form of diversion, but a measure of self-defense as well as a means of self-improvement, resulting often in improved health, a happier frame of mind, and even worldly success.

HYPNOTISM MADE PLAIN

CHAPTER 1.
A RETROSPECT

The story of the origin and development of hypnotism—or mesmerism, as it was once called—is not only interesting in itself, as history, but also helpful to a clear understanding of its modern phases and applications.

What we now call suggestion and hypnotism, and recognize as purely psychological phenomena, were originally believed to be manifestations of a peculiar, universally disseminated fluid, analogous to the ether of the physicists, which could be absorbed by various substances and discharged therefrom.

As early as 1530, the celebrated Swiss physician Paracelsus (1493-1541)—founder of medical chemistry—advanced the theory of “personal magnetism,” or magnetic influences, derived from the universal cosmic magnetic “fluid” or force which, he declared, bound the stars together, and permeated all living things. Each man carries within his own body, he said, a twofold magnetism, one healthful, the other morbid. The magnetism of a healthy person attracts the morbid magnetism of a sick person, thus relieving the latter of his malady. Absorbed by the healthy person, the morbid magnetic force is transformed at once into wholesome magnetism.

Dr. Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus Paracelsus von Hohemeim—Paracelsus’ real name—may or may not have fully believed in his theory of transferable magnetism. He was—for his time—a great physician, and as such a very practical man—a forerunner of the modern pragmatists. If belief in his doctrine on the part of his patient would act as a curative agency, Paracelsus would undoubtedly utilize this doctrine, just as he did astrology—belief in which was universal in his day and age. He appears to have been fully aware of the value of faith if not of suggestion in the cure of disease. “It is all one,” he remarks, “whether you believe in something real or something false, it will have the same effect upon you.... It is always the faith that works the miracle, and whether the faith is aroused by something real or something false its miraculous power is the same.”

A few years later, Jean Baptist van Helmont, “father of chemistry” (1577-1644), stimulated by diligent perusal of the works of Paracelsus, adopted and expounded the doctrine that man possessed a magnetic force capable of healing the sick.[1]

[1] Van Helmont was first to prove the indestructibility of matter in chemical changes by utilizing the balance in analysis, invented the word “gas”, and first used the melting-point of ice and the boiling-point of water as limits of a thermometric scale. He opposed the view of Descartes that the pineal gland is the seat of the soul, his physiological investigations leading him to the conviction that the temple of that entity is the stomach!

The Paracelsean doctrine of a healing magnetic force was introduced into England by Robert Fludd (1574-1637), the physician and theosophist (a partisan of the Rosicrucians). We hear little or nothing of this doctrine in French works until the year 1766, when appeared the dissertation, “De planetarum influxu” (“On the Influence of the Planets”), of the Viennese physician, Friedrich Anton Mesmer (1734-1815)—born near Constance, and later resident in Paris.

Mesmer, like Paracelsus, believed that a magnetic element or fluid pervaded the universe and pervaded all bodies. Following Descartes, he denied that there could be a vacuum anywhere within the cosmos, since the mutual influence between the stars and planets “is transmitted by a fluid universally disseminated, and everywhere continuous, so that no vacuum can exist.” This universal fluid—analogous to the hypothetic ether of space of modern physicists—“is, by its very nature, enabled to receive and retain all impressions of movement, to propagate them and transmit them.” In the human body this medium expresses itself in conditions related to magnetism, and the forces exhibited are of the nature of Animal Magnetism. This force, says Mesmer, may be transferred from the human body to both inanimate and animate bodies, certain substances being more susceptible to this influence than others. “The magnet, too, artificial, as well as natural, is susceptible to animal magnetism, without any impairment of its influence upon iron or the magnetic needle. From this we see that the artificial magnet possesses qualities which are efficacious in sickness, and that if we obtain successful results from its application, these are due merely to animal magnetism.”

Mesmer laid down rules of procedure in accordance with which “this principle is able to cure maladies of the nervous system directly, and other maladies indirectly.”

This method of healing was put into practice in Vienna about 1763, with the co-operation of Dr. Maximillian Hell, Professor of Astronomy, and it is recorded that a number of cures were effected.

Having been bred for the church, it was not difficult for Dr. Mesmer to pass from a belief in cures by “sacred relics” to the treatment of diseases by application of magnetized plates, rings, collars, amulets, etc. As in the case of many “faith” healers of our own day, Mesmer’s fame soon became widespread, reports of his marvelous cures even reaching the court of Louis XVI.

Under the patronage of Marie Antoinette, Mesmer held seances to which people of all classes flocked for treatment, including many men distinguished in the arts and sciences. Unfortunately, Mesmer elected to invest himself and his procedure with an atmosphere of mysticism, arraying himself in yellow robes, bearing a wand in his hand, suggestive of the staff of the ancient followers of Aesculapius.

In the light of our present-day knowledge regarding the power of suggestion as a curative agent, we are not surprised to learn that Dr. Mesmer was able to effect many remarkable cures by convincing his patients of the therapeutic virtues of his magnetized paraphernalia.

Believing as he undoubtedly did that he possessed an “animal magnetism” which could be transferred to inanimate substances, including water, glass, iron, etc., Mesmer constructed his curious “baquet.” This weird apparatus consisted of a wooden tub with an iron rod placed vertically in the center, around which were arranged layers of corked bottles filled with magnetized water—“magnetized” by his own hands, just as he believed he could pass his own “magnetic fluid” directly into the body of a patient. Each bottle was supplied with a conductor, i. e., an iron wire running through the cork and in contact with the central rod. The tub was filled with water, iron filings, pounded glass and sand, previously magnetized by passes of Mesmer’s hands, or by his merely breathing upon them. That the magnetic effluvia might not escape and be dissipated in space, a closely-fitting cover was placed on the tub. “Conductors” passed from the source of the emanations, or fluid, to the patient—woolen or cotton cords, which the patients twined around their bodies. Soft iron rods projected from the baquet, which were placed in contact with any desired part of the patient’s body.

Seated around the baquet, lulled by soft music issuing from the adjoining room, the patients gazed at the dim light, in a more or less hypnotic condition, while the “animal magnetism” supplied by the baquet did its curative work. Mesmer and his assistants passed from one patient to another, making mystic passes over them—directing the fluid—or touching them with the rods. Patients of hysterical temperament sometimes fell into convulsions, which were interpreted by Mesmer as a favorable sign. He even went so far as to assert that there could be no permanent cures without these so-called “crises.” It was not long before Mesmer was publicly denounced as a charlatan and disappeared from the public eye.

Mesmer’s sensational success doubtless aroused the jealousy of the “regular” medical profession. It is known that his claims were very superficially investigated by a committee of scientists. He was duly branded as a quack, and retired into comparative obscurity, “to walk silent on the shore of the Bodensee, meditating on much.” A monument marks his grave in the churchyard of the Meersburg, placed there by admiring German physicians.

Mesmer honestly regarded himself as a martyr, the victim of envious competitors. And we need not doubt that many victims of disease were aided or actually cured by his methods, though no magnetic fluid issued from his rings and amulets to be guided by his mystic wand; just as in our days sufferers are helped—through auto-suggestion—by the “anti-rheumatic ring,” “electric” belts and pads void of electricity, or pink pills containing no curative drugs. All of these devices are but modern recrudescences of the very ancient practice of suggestion and hypnosis, “laying on of hands,” touching the king’s gold ring, or the ancient custom of healing by the art of making passes.

In the temples of Isis, of Osiris and of Serapis, hypnotism and suggestion were common practices. Indeed, some form of psycho-therapeutics, by means of touch or passes, was practiced amongst all the nations of antiquity whose records have come down to us even in fragmentary form. We are assured by Plutarch that Pyrrhus, the famous king of Epirus, was able to relieve colic and affections of the spleen by laying the patients on their backs and passing his great toe over them. Cures by the laying on of hands were effected also by pagan Roman emperors and Christian saints, as well as by the priests of ancient Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, Chaldea, Persia, China and India—accompanied by mystic “passes.”

Why not, then, cures by the baquet of Mesmer, or the “Oscilloclast” of Dr. Albert Abrams, as well as the healing at Lourdes, St. Anne de Beaupré and other shrines? A magnetic element pervades the universe and penetrates all bodies, said Mesmer, capable of receiving and communicating all kinds of motions and impressions. All bodies are radio-active, said Abrams, and emit electronic vibrations (?) capable of reinforcing and finally breaking down the electronic waves characteristic of each disease. Relics of the saints have the power of healing the sick, says the Roman Catholic Church. And in each case the cures are assuredly made—by suggestion and auto-suggestion.

When an Australian aborigine believes (imagines) that an enemy has struck him at a distance, to all intents and purposes he is so struck. Promptly he lies down and becomes actually ill—through the power of auto-suggestion—frequently followed by gradual loss of vitality ending before long in death (Klaatsch). But this power of the imagination (auto-suggestion) to work harm—as well as good—is not confined to savages. Baudouin tells of a case, noted by Coué, of a nun who was confined to her bed by illness during the winter. She soon recovered, becoming well and strong again. On April 1st her appetite disappeared, in a few days she was again confined to her bed, and she died before the end of the month. She thought she had heard her physician say, during her winter illness, “She won’t outlive April.” The suggestion that she was to die before the close of April became fixed in her mind, so, feeling sure that she would die in April, in April she died. Many similar cases are on record.

With the exception of the private—and gratuitous—work carried on by the Marquis de Puységur, who substituted a gentle sleep for convulsions, and by the Abbé Faria, who was the first to state the doctrine of suggestion, we hear very little about mesmerism in France for some years following the retirement of its founder.

In England a number of physicians became interested. Among the pioneers should be mentioned John Elliotson (1837), whose attention was directed to the subject by a French nobleman, to whose house leading members of the medical profession had been invited to witness a demonstration. Dr. Elliotson was profoundly impressed by the experiments there witnessed, and used his position on the staff of University College Hospital to employ mesmerism in treating patients. He was particularly successful in cases of nervous diseases. As President of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Societies, his opinion would, in any other instance, have carried great weight. Owing to the characteristic conservatism not only of the medical profession, but of scientists in general, his use of mesmerism in the hospital, though remarkably successful, was met by the violent opposition that pertains to most radical departures from the practices sanctioned by “authority.” Refusing to bow to the mandate of unreasoned conservatism, Dr. Elliotson was obliged to resign. Retiring to private practice, he continued the use of mesmerism with increasingly satisfactory results, though unaware of the fact that no “animal magnetism”—or vital fluid—was involved in the process. This discovery was due to James Braid, a noted surgeon of Manchester.

Having witnessed a public exhibition of so-called mesmerism, Braid became convinced (1841) that there was therapeutic value in the method. He determined to explore the subject thoroughly, concerning himself not only with the practical application of hypnotism, but also with an attempt to explain the fundamental nature of the phenomena witnessed. Accepting, tentatively, the theories advanced by Mesmer, he soon arrived at the conclusion that there was no “vital force” or “animal magnetism” involved; hence there could be no question of magnets, metals, and crystals transmitting such a curative fluid. Braid found, by experiment, that he could produce all the phenomena attributed to the action of Mesmer’s “vital fluid” by merely inducing the patient to fix his gaze upon any bright object, held at a short distance in front of and slightly higher than the level of the patient’s eyes, accompanied by concentration of the mind on the object. The desired state of drowsiness or even complete unconsciousness was shown to be evokable without resort to magnets or passes, the phenomenon being entirely subjective, and quite independent of “animal magnetism.” He attributed hypnosis to a tiring of the sensory organs.

Braid noted that the depths of the sleep induced varied in different persons from slight drowsiness to a state of complete unconsciousness. The latter condition he defined as “neurohypnotism, or nervous sleep, a peculiar condition of the nervous system produced by artificial contrivance.” He later proposed that this condition be termed Hypnosis, and the process involved Hypnotism, or Neurohypnology, limiting the term “hypnotic sleep” to those cases where on awakening entire forgetfulness of all that had occurred during sleep was acknowledged by the patient. Braid was first to demonstrate that there is a close relationship between hypnosis and natural sleep.

As might be expected by a student of the history of science, Braid’s very important work failed to elicit the support and encouragement of the British medical fraternity, who should have been most profoundly interested in his results. In Germany and Switzerland, however, his name was held in honor, a number of investigators on the Continent having become deeply interested in the practical application of hypnotism to medical practice. Among these may be mentioned Krafft-Ebing, Preyer, Oskar Vogt, Euelenburg, Heidenhain, Wetterstrand, Forel and Albert Moll. It has well been said that Braid laid the foundation of the theories elaborated later (1891-4) by F. W. H. Myers, of Cambridge, and Carpenter, basing the phenomena of hypnotism on the existence and activity of a subliminal consciousness.

In 1860, the year of Braid’s death, his discovery of the subjective nature of so-called mesmerism was published by the Paris Academy of Science.

The researches of Braid attracted the attention of Dr. Liébault, of Nancy, who, in 1864, opened up a dispensary in that town for the gratuitous treatment of the poor by hypnotism. Braid was first to assert that suggestion was the only external factor involved in producing the phenomena of hypnosis, but the credit for demonstrating this fact beyond a doubt is usually given to Liébault, who disavowed Braid’s “tired senses” theory, pronouncing hypnotism to be wholly the result of suggestion (in an essay in 1866). This pioneer did not, however, explain the condition of mind necessary for the production of the phenomena of hypnotism. The elucidation of this problem was the work of F. W. H. Myers.

Myers assumed that man is endowed with both a supraliminal consciousness and a subliminal or subconscious intelligence—taking ordinary consciousness as a hypothetical level or limen (threshold). This theory does not predicate the existence of two minds, however, or two separate intelligences. Myers wished merely to point out that the stream of consciousness in which we habitually live is not our only one, and forms, in fact, only a small part of our total personality, most of which lies below the threshold of our ordinary waking consciousness. But the subliminal part of personality is by no means “merely an unconscious complex of organic processes, but an intelligent vital control.”

Modern psycho-therapeutics (mind-treatment of disease, through suggestion), as also psycho-analysis, takes for granted the dual functioning of mind, one part conscious, the other part subconscious. Hypnotism and suggestion become understandable on the hypothesis put forth by Myers, and on no other theory can we account for the phenomena involved. “By means of hypnotism the attention of the conscious mind may be distracted, and this leaves the operator free to communicate with the subconscious.”

This in brief is the history of the progress from “animal magnetism” to hypnotism through purely psychical (mental) methods. It but remains to add a few words relative to the new views introduced by Emile Coué, colleague (1885-86) of Liébault, founder of the first school of Nancy, as Coué may justly be called founder of the “New Nancy School.”

The originality of Coué’s work consists in the fact that by his method cures are effected without resort to hypnosis or even to the suggestion of a second person. He relies entirely upon auto-suggestion, which he regards as the effective force in hypnotic suggestion. Furthermore, it is conceded by several eminent authorities that Coué has fully established the law of reversed effort, which is said to be operative in all cases of suggestion. Effective auto-suggestion depends upon the elimination—or at least the partial elimination—of the conscious will. Will-power must give way to the curative—not to say creative—power of the imagination. “In a conflict between will and imagination,” says Coué, “the power of imagination is in direct proportion to the square of the will-power.”[2]

[2] This new theory of suggestion has recently been ably expounded by Prof. Charles Baudouin, of Geneva, in his “Suggestion and Auto-Suggestion”, translated from the French by Eden and Cedar Paul.

CHAPTER 2.
MODERN HYPNOTIC METHODS

Modern methods of inducing complete hypnosis, or the suggestive semi-trance, vary with the temperament and training (theoretical convictions) of the hypnotist. Some employ the method of Braid, others of Liébault, or, again, a combination of the two.

In certain cases, the ancient method of employing passes, at a slight distance from the body, is used, especially when a deep hypnotic trance is deemed desirable. The regular, monotonous stroking motions have a potent tranquilizing effect, and aid also in concentrating the patient’s attention. This was the method of Puységur, who sought to induce the gentle sleep rather inaptly called by him “somnambulism.”

The Abbé Faria depended mostly upon emphatic pronouncing of the word “sleep,” after the subject had been comfortably ensconced in an easy chair. In obdurate cases he laid his hands upon the crown of the head, on both brows, or elsewhere, as the occasion seemed to demand.

Disciples of Braid seek, before all else, to obtain results through mental concentration and attention, holding a glittering object above the level of the eyebrows, at a distance of a foot or more from the subject’s eyes. The effort of the eyes to gaze fixedly at the brilliant object, accompanied by banishment of all thoughts apart from the object, usually induces the hypnotic state.

Not a few modern psycho-therapists employ Liébault’s method to induce hypnosis, though certain modifications of his practice are often introduced. The patient is usually placed in a comfortable chair and requested to “think of nothing,” gazing meanwhile into the face, or at the raised finger, of the operator. The patient is then told in a soothing voice that his eyelids are heavy, that his limbs feel numb: “You are getting more and more drowsy. You are falling asleep,” etc. If this procedure is followed for a minute or two, the desired degree of “somnambulism” is usually induced.

Patients vary considerably in their susceptibility to suggestion. Freedom from fear and nervousness are prerequisites to satisfactory results. This may be effected by frank and friendly preparatory talk, the operator’s aim being to create a sympathetic atmosphere, while at the same time conveying the impression that he has complete command of the situation, and is fully able to give the help sought by the subject. This is the procedure employed by Dr. A. M. Hutchison, the very successful English psycho-therapist.

There is a tendency on the part of nervous patients to contract the muscles, clench the jaw, assuming unconsciously an attitude of rigidity. Just the opposite condition, says Hutchison, is required. There must first be complete relaxation of all the muscles, as well as of the mind. This may be accomplished by allowing the mind to dwell upon pleasant memories or lovely scenes, followed by an effort to make the mind as near a blank as possible. Gazing steadfastly at the upraised finger of the operator is conducive to this condition. The fixed gaze serves only as a preliminary to complete auto-suggestion, without which a deeper condition of hypnosis cannot be produced. The operator in the last analysis merely aids the subject in hypnotizing himself, the hypnosis being merely a means to an end, which is the reception of suggestions by the subconscious mind, suitable to the disease, or bad habit, for which treatment is sought.

As said previously, it is now well established that the mind is dual in character, one part being conscious and the other subconscious. Under hypnosis the conscious mind is for the time being distracted, or in a state of abeyance. In this condition the subconscious mind is open to suggestions from the operator. The suggestions being intended for the welfare of the subject, they are passively received, retained, and automatically acted upon by the individual, unconsciously.

In cases where the patient is the victim of a bad habit, the operator merely needs to suggest to the subconscious mind that the habit is extremely detrimental to the health or worldly success of the patient, and must be got rid of. The suggestions act directly upon the subconscious mind, and when later the patient is tempted to continue the objectionable habit, there comes into play a restraining impulse—an inhibition from the subconscious part of the mind. In some cases repulsion takes the place of the former desire.

Mental suggestion is successfully employed not only in the eradication of bad habits, but also in the treatment of many diseases, among which may be mentioned certain forms of insomnia, constipation, obsessions, early melancholia, paralysis, St. Vitus’ dance. It is also effective in such cases as stammering, writer’s cramp, stage-fright, and as a substitute for gas in dentistry, or for chloroform, etc., in some other instances where an anaesthetic would ordinarily be employed.

Professor Wetterstrand is speaking from long experience when he declares that “the palliative effect of suggestion as a soporific and anodyne remedy in serious and incurable diseases, such as tuberculosis, cancer, etc., is far too little appreciated.” The great value of suggestion in every day medical practice as “an aperient, an appetizer, a soporific, and a means of regulating the digestion, the secretions and the menstrual discharge” was pointed out by Professor Forel, and, as he remarked, “is far too little realized.” The method has proved of great value in the treatment of alcoholism, addiction to morphia, neuralgia and hysteria.

Some persons are not hypnotizable. Just what the percentage is who are obdurate to hypnosis is not definitely known. Much depends on the skill and personality of the operator. Experienced psycho-therapists have stated that only about one person in every ten reaches the state of deep sleep. On the other hand, Dr. Liébault, who hypnotized a great number of persons of all ages and occupations, and of both sexes, found that of 1,000 persons subjected by him to hypnotic experiments, 460 fell into a deep trance, 223 into a very deep trance, 129 into a deep hypnosis, 30 into a light hypnosis, 100 into a light trance, and 26 remained refractory. As a rule only a certain degree of drowsiness is required for successful medical treatment.

Generally speaking, no one can be hypnotized against his will. And it should be noted particularly here that no one can ever be made to do anything under hypnosis that would be against his nature or his moral convictions when he was awake. A teetotaller cannot be made to drink alcoholic liquor, or even water that he is told is wine or whiskey; an honest man cannot be made to steal; a peaceful man to fight. A strong emotion—a deep-seated love or hatred—has more power over the subconscious mind than has any hypnotic suggestion. So considered, “Trilby,” for example, is based on a pure absurdity—no influence of Svengali’s could ever have made Trilby give up her love for little Billee.

Hutchison finds that “the best subject for hypnosis is the person who has the intelligence to understand what is asked of him and the ability to concentrate his mind upon it.” Intelligent co-operation is a desideratum. It is all but impossible, in most cases, to hypnotize an insane person or an imbecile.

Professor Wetterstrand, a famous psychiatrist and hypnotist of Stockholm, utilizes a method of hypnosis which, it is claimed, is effective in about 97 per cent of the cases that come before him—numbering at the time 3,148 persons. He employs what may, perhaps, justly be called mass hypnosis. Instead of the usual procedure of handling one patient at a time, he “hypnotizes his patients wholesale.” He uses two large rooms, heavily carpeted and curtained, to prevent noise and resonance. Both rooms are furnished with sofas, reclining chairs, and also with easy chairs for patients who do not wish to recline.

Beginning his work with patients who have been hypnotized on previous occasions, he goes from one patient to another, merely whispering suggestions into each patient’s ear, quite inaudible to the other patients. Those thus hypnotized at the beginning he soon awakes. By thus showing that he has full control of the situation, a feeling of confidence is produced in the waiting newcomers, who have never before been under this treatment. The very sight of so many hypnotized persons exercises an hypnotic influence on all present—a form of mass suggestion. It is then an easy matter to induce the hypnotic sleep even in those who have come for their first treatment.

In his recent work, “Suggestion and Auto-suggestion,” Prof. Charles Baudouin has elucidated the new theory of suggestion offered by Emile Coué, referred to previously.

Coué, as I have already said, seems to have established the fact that we have considerable power over ourselves through imagination, curative results being obtained without the aid of a second person to make suggestions. In a sense, the cures are effected by hypnotism, but the hypnotism is self-hypnotism, auto-suggestion. He holds that hypnotic suggestion, and the ordinary waking suggestion made by a second person, are merely different methods of applying auto-suggestion. The cures are effected by “creative imagination.” The will in these matters is negative, and must be as far as possible eliminated. It is obstructive, not creative. If the will and the imagination are in conflict, the powers of imagination are virtually nullified. “In a conflict between will and imagination, the power of imagination is in direct proportion to the square of the will-power,” declares Coué.

It is very desirable that the patient should have faith in his physician—faith in the efficacy of his treatment. But, as remarked by that experienced psycho-therapist, Dr. Albert E. Davis, the patient must take his share in combating the disease, and then he will understand that his cure had come through no other source than his own mind.

To one who has given the matter little or no study, Coué’s famous formula, “Day by day, in every way, I’m getting better and better,” or “My pain is passing away,” frequently repeated aloud, may appear to be a fruitless, not to say foolish, procedure. But there are thousands of persons who know by experience that the method is in many cases highly efficient; not only helpful but actually curative. As Dr. Davis well points out, the message which is uttered is being conveyed to a part of the mind—the subconscious—“which is incapable of controversial argument, and constant repetition will have its effect. That mind, prior to this, has implicitly believed its possessor every time he said ‘I am very ill.’ Why should it not be convinced, even more by suggestions which are in conformity with the natural desire to be strong and healthy?”[3]

[3] Albert E. Davis is Honorary Physician to the Liverpool Psycho-Therapeutic Clinic, and the author of “Hypnotism and Treatment by Suggestion”, Fourth Edition, New York, 1923.

Another very interesting development of “creative imagination” is pointed out in “Sex Antagonism,” by Heape. It is generally believed among scientists that stories of pre-natal “markings” are mere superstition, and undoubtedly most of them are fancied resemblances without connection with any previous experience on the part of the mother. Nevertheless the instances given by Mr. Heape must be considered unless they can be disproved. For example, a lizard dropped from the ceiling upon the naked breast of a pregnant woman. She declared (imagined) that her child would be born with a mark of a lizard on its breast. It was. Again, a woman’s husband returned from the war with his face slashed in the form of a cross. The woman imagined that her expected child would be born with such a disfiguring slash. The child was born with the marking on its face.

According to this school of thought, it was not fear that the markings would appear on the child (as is claimed by most persons who believe in pre-natal markings) that produced the resulting disfigurement; it was the result of creative imagination. For the woman, the marking, in imagination, had already been made. Had she taken an opposite attitude, and visualized the face and body of the infant as perfectly normal, it is most likely that no “birth-mark” would have been created,—created, as a matter of fact, by the mother herself.

Wetterstrand, Forel, Krafft-Ebing and others have shown that in certain individuals redness and swelling of the skin, and even blistering or ulceration, may be induced by hypnotism. I have myself witnessed the appearance of a white cross on a woman’s forearm by auto-suggestion. There can be no doubt that the genuine cases of “stigmatization”—supposed by the faithful to be the result of a divine miracle rewarding holiness—are the effect of auto-suggestion—imagination. In all, some 150 cases of stigmatization have been recorded, the three I am about to mention having all occurred within the last hundred years. No scientist today regards the wounds—replicas of the injuries stated to have been caused by the nails in Jesus’ hands and feet—which appeared in the hands and feet of Maria von Morll, for example, as “faked.” The same may be said of the stigmata of Katharine Emmerich and Louise Lateau. The verdict of science is that these women were hysterical invalids, not pious impostors. These wounds are, declared Professor Delboeuf, a psychologist of Liège, “auto-suggestive phenomena resulting from the intensive concentration of the attention upon the wounds of Christ.” An equal concentration of the mind on the part of an expectant mother might well produce, by suggestion, any form of birth-mark on the body of an unborn infant. At least, there is no positive evidence to the contrary; although, as remarked above, most of such cases reported are the result of mere superstitious credulity.

Good health, normality, if imagined to exist, may, within certain limits (or under certain conditions) be created. This at least is the doctrine of the New Nancy School. That Coué has to his credit many cures effected by his new methods of auto-suggestion is conceded by most, if not all, practising psycho-therapists who have investigated the subject.

Auto-suggestion is founded on “the great law that the subconscious part of mind governs the physical body, and in its turn is controlled by reasoned suggestions from the conscious mind.” It is not even necessary that the suggestions made in the first instance should be true: they may be quite contrary to fact and apparently opposed to all reason. By reiteration the desired effect is produced, and they become true. When a person in pain persists in saying “I have no pain,” or an inveterate smoker in saying “I have no desire to smoke,” the one is opposed to sensation and the other to fact. The effect, however, is soon apparent; the pain lessens, and the desire to smoke is diminished.”[4]

[4] Davis, Op. cit., Pages 50-51.

It should not be forgotten, in giving oneself auto-suggestive treatment, that pain is a signal. To remove pain without finding out what has caused it may be a very dangerous procedure. But as a temporary measure, or as a means of alleviation of the pain arising from an affliction already diagnosed and under treatment, it may be of great value.

Most persons today are not averse to speaking casually of the power of mind over matter, but when it comes to a practical application of the principle they are inclined to “side-step.” Yet it is self-evident that many persons increase their discomforts and ills by brooding over them. It is equally self-evident that pain and even illness can in many cases be allayed or eliminated by an opposite course—an affirmation of well-being, of health and joy.

The basis of “Christian Science” and other mind-healing cults is faith, and faith cures are not all legendary. None of them is “miraculous.” Auto-suggestion, imagination, working on the subconscious mind, can accomplish wonders. The task of the scientist is to find out what are the limitations of these psycho-therapeutic methods of treatment. The Christian Scientist believes that there are no inherent limitations—and dies.

CHAPTER 3.
PHENOMENA OF HYPNOTISM

Let anyone who is skeptical concerning the power of mind over matter consider even a few of the many amazing phenomena of hypnotism. Public exhibitions of hypnotic experiments were, not long ago, frequently given in this country and in Europe. The Danish hypnotist, Hansen, rolled up a considerable fortune in this way. In most of the German states, and in Holland, Belgium and Switzerland, such performances are prohibited. They should be made illegal in the United States; for, in the hands of “Professors” ignorant of either psychology or medicine, much harm can be done by such exhibitions, both to the public at large and to the participants. The showmen-hypnotists have in mind only the entertainment of audiences and are little concerned about any bodily or mental injury that may be done the volunteer subjects.

While the really important work in hypnotism and auto-suggestion is being pursued by psychiatrists (alienists) and physicians in laboratories and clinics, demonstrating “the influence of mind over matter,” their results are not so obvious, so easily understood, as the spectacular performances of the showmen-hypnotists.

As a rule there is no necessity for these showmen to place “tools” in the auditorium to volunteer when requests are made for subjects for demonstration. Among the many real volunteers who are curious to see if they can be hypnotized, it is not a difficult matter for the experienced showman to select some well suited to his purpose, though he succeeds better with some of these than with others. The unsuitable persons having been rejected, it is not long before the expert has a band of hypnotized subjects doing the goose-step behind him, utterly devoid of any impulse of their own, ready on command to perform whatever ridiculous—and therefore laughter-provoking—“stunt” he may suggest.

Limbs are stiffened and retained in any posture selected by the hypnotist, and without fatigue to the subject. Laid horizontally, the whole body may be made rigid, so that if the head be placed on one chair and the heels on another, the body forming a bridge between the two, heavy loads quite beyond the person’s normal powers are readily borne by him. Certain movements of the arms or legs once begun, the subject cannot of his own will inhibit them. A needle run through a fold of the skin will cause no pain. Told that he is an orchestral conductor, the volunteer will soberly conduct an imaginary orchestra, waving the baton to and fro. Ordered to give three cheers for “the king of Iceland” three minutes after awakening, the subject will, promptly at the time suggested, suddenly break forth with the cheers for the imaginary king, though unable to account for his by now embarrassing foolishness. The same result will occur if the order is given for 243 or 2043 minutes after awakening—the subconscious mind will keep accurate count.

These phenomena are genuine in character, and are all capable of a psychological explanation. In the cataleptic or deeper stages of hypnotism, the subject loses all consciousness of the external world, still, however, hearing and obeying the voice of the operator. On awakening he has either partially or wholly forgotten all that has occurred during his somnambulistic sleep or trance.

Psychotherapists usually designate as somnambulism the (third) phase of hypnotism wherein all that has happened during the trance is completely forgotten. The term is objectionable, however, since it is commonly applied to sleep-walking (in somno ambulare—to walk in sleep). For this reason Louis Satow suggests that the term somnambulance be applied to sleep-walking, and somnambulism to the deepest phase of hypnotic sleep.[5]

[5] In his excellent book, “Hypnotism and Suggestion” (translated by Bernard Miall), Page 76, New York, 1923.

Hutchison regards sleep-walking as a counterpart of hypnotic sleep. As is well known, not a few persons during natural sleep leave their beds and wander about the house, or even go out into the street or climb on the roof, performing dangerous feats in a state of entire unconsciousness. Entering a room where other persons are sitting, they will answer any questions put to them, or carry on a conversation. Some undertake complicated transactions, usually those which are “most frequently included in the circle of their work and thought, and which concern them also in their waking moments” (Satow). Upon awakening the sleep-walker has no recollection of his actions during sleep.

Coué would explain that the somnambulist performs what are often perilous feats, usually with perfect security, because of his absence of fear; that is, he does not imagine himself falling from the height scaled, or the narrow board or path traversed in his wanderings. Satow says that sleep-walkers are “unaware of a large number of sensory impressions, and for this reason do not recognize danger.” However, as he further observes, somnambulists have occasionally “come to grief during their perilous wanderings,” as shown by authentic results. Usually, the business in hand having been accomplished, the sleep-walker finds his way back to bed, spontaneous waking during the performance being of rare occurrence.

Dr. Baerwald, of the Humboldt Academy in Berlin, tells of a sleep-walker who, without being hypnotized, was able to recite the words of a book which another person was reading (the letters being one two hundred and fiftieth of an inch high) although the latter sat facing the somnambulist, with the back of the book turned to him. The reader will doubtless jump to the plausible conclusion that this was a case of telepathy—mind-reading. Not so. Induced to close his eyes, the sleep-walker could no longer “recite the words of the book.” The somnambulist had actually been reading the book from the reflected image of the type in the pupils of the reader’s eyes! Doubtless such acuteness of vision does not occur in the waking state.

In both hypnotic somnambulism (deep sleep) and sleep-walking, the essential characteristic is lack of remembrance of the events which have occurred. But in the case of the sleep-walker even the prick of a needle would cause him to awake; whereas in the deepest phase of hypnotic sleep marked anaesthesia occurs. In pre-chloroform days, Esdaile and others were enabled to carry out large numbers of major and minor surgical operations without pain to the patient. Even in recent times, painless tooth-extraction and painless childbirth have occurred with the aid of hypnotic sleep.

In the first phase of hypnosis, only sleepiness is induced. The influenced person, in this stage, can resist suggestion and open his eyes (Forel). With this degree of hypnosis alone, many cases of cure have been effected.

Dr. Hutchison states that adequate anaesthesia can also be induced by suggestion in the state of light sleep (second phase), when the patient is fully conscious, allowing painless tooth-extraction: “only the sight of the extracted tooth has carried conviction to the patient.”

Cases of profound anaesthesia without loss of consciousness have been frequently noted on the battle-field, where soldiers have been severely wounded, even including severance of important parts of the body, without pain, and even without knowing for a time that the injury had been inflicted. It is probable that the sudden shock in such cases paralyzes the nerves, hence there can be no sensation of pain registered in the cerebrum. On the other hand, it is quite possible that on the field of battle the condition is purely psychological, the victim being in a sort of trance, as a result of excitement.

Certain of the martyrs appear to have been in such a state at the time of their burning at the stake or similar torturing deaths—“a result of the state of intense exaltation into which they fell in anticipation of martyrdom,” rendering them to a great extent oblivious to injuries which would otherwise result in unspeakable agony. It is said that Archimedes, the greatest mathematicion of antiquity, was so deeply engrossed in some geometrical problem that he was unaware of the fact that Syracuse had been taken by the Romans, and that he had received a mortal wound, even though his life-blood was flowing away.

Concentration of thought is one aspect of hypnosis, rendering one unconscious of the external world and its doings. Thus, again, Archimedes having discovered how to determine the specific weight of bodies while he was taking a bath, the well-known story goes that he became so excited over the solution that he rushed to the street stark naked, shouting as he ran, “Eureka! Eureka!” (I have found it! I have found it!). Had his thigh been pierced by an arrow as he ran, it is doubtful if he would, for the moment have felt any pain from the wound inflicted.

Everyone is familiar with the undisputed fact that the medicine-man (shaman) of certain savage tribes is capable of producing—by auto-suggestion—anaesthesia which enables him to dance barefoot in the midst of a fire, or over red-hot boulders. Many savages, by means of rhythmical, long-protracted dances, produce a form of auto-hypnosis which enables them to inflict severe wounds in their flesh which do not bleed and quickly heal.

Hypnotists find it quite possible to render a person incapable (during the hypnotic state) of exercising his faculties of tasting, smelling, seeing or hearing, “except in so far as the operator allows him to do so.” Told that a glass of water is bubbling champagne, the subject (unless deeply opposed on principle: see previously) smacks his lips with intense satisfaction; or he chews chalk for candy with equal gusto. He will, at the command of the operator, smell asafetida as a delicious violet odor, or pronounce strong ammonia an odorless liquid, inhaling it without discomfort. The subconscious mind is not endowed with an olfactory lobe or gustatory organs. Capacity for pain is an exclusive property of the conscious mind. Hence the anaesthesia of hypnotism.

An incident narrated by Dr. Wingfield shows at once the source of “automatic writing” and the power of subconscious mind to remember what the conscious mind knows nothing about.

Having hypnotized his patient, during somnambulism he made him imagine that he was (1) riding with the hounds, (2) rowing a race in his college boat, and (3) that next morning he would put a boot on one foot and a shoe on the other. “On waking he knew none of these things. I then made him put his hand on a planchette, and asked ‘What did he do first?’ After a few meaningless scratches it wrote ‘hunting.’ ‘When then?’ I asked. ‘Rowed in the races,’ was the answer. ‘Did I tell him to do anything?’ ‘Boot one, shoe one,’ said the planchette.”

Dr. Wingfield calls attention to the fact that the knowledge possessed by the planchette was exactly commensurate with that possessed by the subject during somnambulism. “It will thus be seen that any loss of memory after hypnosis is only apparent and not real.”

This power of the subconscious to remember facts, names, the measurement of time, and even languages, wholly unknown to the conscious mind, has frequently aroused astonishment in the learned and superstitious awe in the uninstructed. The Countess deLaval, for example, talked the Breton language in her sleep, but could not understand a word of Breton when awake. (She had heard it spoken in early childhood.) An illiterate servant, in a state of trance, spoke Hebrew fluently, but knew nothing whatever of the language when awake. It was learned that she had years before been in service with a clergyman who had a habit of memorizing Hebrew aloud.

The ouija-board or planchette aids the subconscious in bringing to consciousness forgotten memories. But the subconscious mind is highly imaginative, and often a great liar—as the ouija-board attests!

In some cases, suggestions made to a person under hypnotic treatment retain their hold on the subject after he has been wakened, and it then becomes necessary to re-hypnotize the subject, suggesting contrary ideas. A hypnotized person may be led to believe that a dear friend has done him a great injustice, or stolen his purse, or that he has seen Smith or Jones commit a grave crime. In such cases of post-hypnotic hallucinations—as they are called—the subject, after waking, if questioned will describe in full detail the circumstances of the injury done him, and would be fully capable of giving evidence to support his hallucination in a court of law. Some persons even develop similar hallucinations by auto-suggestion.

“It is familiar to us all,” says Dr. Hutchison, “how readily some people can ... fabricate the details of a scandal, can, so to speak, create for themselves the hallucination of a scandal, every incident of which they believe themselves to have seen. For this it suffices simply that some one person should rest under slight suspicion, that a slight rumor should be set afloat, and ere long idle onlookers create the details which are wanting, and which they implicitly believe they have founded on fact. Nowhere are more striking instances of this seen than in law courts, when an attempt is made to sift evidence. It is a well-known fact that a clever counsel may lead a witness into accepting and confirming most contradictory statements, by merely suggesting with an air of conviction that certain events had or had not been witnessed by him.”

Very interesting is the phenomenon of post-hypnotic suggestion. The suggestion is made during the hypnotic sleep that the subject perform certain acts after the lapse of a certain time, in the waking state. A young woman was told by Dr. Milne Bramwell to address a letter to him 12,500 minutes from the time at which she came out of the hypnotic sleep. Although she remembered nothing of the request on waking, at the exact second of expiration of the 12,500 minutes she wrote the letter, believing that the act was entirely voluntary. In this case, the woman was quite incapable of calculating the time consciously. In other cases Dr. Bramwell suggested to the hypnotized subjects that certain messages should be delivered at a fixed date, at a certain hour. Notwithstanding the fact that obstacles were purposely put in their path, the subjects faithfully carried out the commands at the appointed hour.

For the sake of the experiment, hypnotized subjects have been commanded to do rather absurd things at a specified time. Having carried out the suggestion, and asked why the act was performed, the subject will frequently attempt to give a good reason why he had done so and so, believing fully that he had done it of his own accord. “Even when delusions of the senses occur in the waking state,” says Satow, “without hypnosis, we must assume that the persons affected are not, for the time being, for some reason or other, in a position to correct the creations of their imaginative faculties by reference to realities, and therefore regard them as real. So Luther, who was still deep in the superstitions of his day, regarded the devil who appeared to him on the Wartburg as being so real that he hurled his inkstand after him.”

Post-hypnotic results are often utilized to very good advantage by the psycho-therapist, since all psycho-physical processes can be influenced. For example, a person suffering from sleeplessness may be given very definite directions as to the hour at which he will become drowsy and the number of hours he will sleep. Such suggestions, however, may not always be responded to literally, but in some cases only a gradual improvement in sleeping occurs. Dr. Hutchison finds that “definite suggestions may be given in a case of obstinate constipation to act later in the form of a post-hypnotic suggestion, and so lead after a few treatments to the complete cure of the constipation. The various secretions may be influenced on the same lines, and so appetite and the ability to digest any food can be successfully suggested in a person suffering from loss of appetite and who may have refrained from solid foods for weeks or months.”

According to Satow, all remedial hypnosis depends upon post-hypnotic effects. “The cure of all sorts of complaints—stammering, agoraphobia, insomnia, incontinence of urine, etc.—is complete only if it holds good after hypnosis. All post-hypnotic suggestions are much more easily realized if ordered to be carried out at a given time.... To explain the effect of post-hypnotic suggestions it must be assumed that after hypnosis a condition of greater vigilance and increased nervous activity continues in the subconsciousness.”

It has been observed that in arithmetical experiments many persons when hypnotized are able to add up 20% more figures than in the waking state. But no hypnotist can enable a subject to work out mathematical problems with which the subject is wholly unfamiliar in the waking state, since “no idea can ever be invoked which has not already consciously or unconsciously found its way into the mind” (Satow). In the same way, no hypnotist can enable anyone to play the piano who has not been accustomed to play it.

It is quite true, however, that mathematicians have solved problems during sleep which baffled them when awake. And the story of how the great Paganini awoke one morning to find his famous “Sonate du Diable” written in score by his bedside has often been told. Knowing nothing of the marvelous workings of the subconscious mind, Paganini ascribed the composition to the devil. A friend of my own frequently sells stories and poems which are the products of dreams. Robert Louis Stevenson always declared that “the Brownies” gave him his stories in his sleep.

CHAPTER 4.
HYPNOTISM AND PSYCHO-ANALYSIS

While Dr. Albert E. Davis utilizes psycho-analysis as an adjunct to hypnosis and suggestion, most psycho-analysts are opposed to the employment of suggestive therapeutics in any case whatever. The late André Tridon, in particular, in his well-known treatise, “Psycho-Analysis and Behavior” (1920), points out that hypnotism and psycho-analysis “have nothing in common but are in fact the exact opposite of each other: hypnotism introduces something into the subject’s mind, psycho-analysis takes something out of it.”

The “something” that hypnotism introduces into the subject’s mind is the suggestion that the cells and organs of the body perform their functions in a normal manner, thus eliminating diseased conditions, leading to restoration of the patient’s health, and without the necessity for drugs. In many cases the same results can be achieved by psycho-analysis, by digging out the original causes and removing the complexes or obsessions. But this is not equivalent to saying that hypnotic suggestion is not in many cases a valuable therapeutic remedy. Since the ordinary custom, in the case of illness in a family, is to call in a physician, the question is whether suggestion can do the work usually thought to be produced only by the taking of medicine.

As a matter of fact, “suggestion can steady a palpitating heart equally as well as belladonna, or take the place of digitalis in heart disease by diminishing the number of beats and resting the heart muscles” (Davis). When a patient has a cold he is ordinarily put to bed and given drugs to induce perspiration. But he can also be put to bed and perspiration can be induced by hypnotic suggestion. By hypnotic suggestion, according to reputable psycho-therapists, constipation can be cured naturally, without recourse to drugs, by re-establishing healthy functional activity in the glands secreting the intestinal juices. By hypnosis a natural sleep can be made to supersede insomnia, followed by cheerfulness and capacity for hard work the morning following.

“The real value of hypnotism,” says Dr. Davis, “lies in the fact that it provides us with an additional weapon, which is enormously important, in the fight against disease. Through it the subject is better able to control his organism in his own interest. He cannot realize too plainly that the force which is exerted comes not from the hypnotist, but from himself. It is from the inner self the change arises; the hypnotist simply awakens dormant protective instincts. The best results are achieved when the patient understands this, for he will employ in his waking moments the same agency as that resorted to by the operator under hypnosis.”

What the hypnotist does is to stimulate the subconscious activities of body and mind. Very interesting and instructive in this connection is the following statement by Dr. Davis: “The sense of smell is greatly developed. I have had several subjects who, under hypnotism, could identify by sense of smell alone the owners of purses, keys and other articles of personal use. In hearing, it is well known that the subject can distinguish the faintest whisper of the operator inaudible to bystanders. Other powers are equally strengthened.... All of these instances enable one to realize the power of hypnotism to restore the proper working of bodily functions.”

Granted that psycho-analysis will also cure these same ailments which are reached by hypnotism or suggestion—may cure some of them better; but must one spend weeks or months exploring the history of the subconscious life in order to relieve a toothache or an attack of constipation?

Tridon seemed to think he was making out a strong case against suggestive therapeutics by pointing our similarities between neurotic and hypnotic states. “Every neurose,” he declared, “is a form of auto-suggestion.” Well, what of it? The business of the hypnotist is to help the patient to help himself in throwing off the neurose. And in many cases he does. In some cases he may fail. But as much can be said also of the psycho-analyst.

“The neurotic who consults a hypnotist is, after all, seeking a quick escape from reality, from effort, from responsibilities,” says Tridon (Op. cit., Page 275). If the “reality” happens to be neuralgia, or writer’s cramp, or a desire for alcohol in excess, why not seek to “escape” from it as soon as possible, with or without “responsibilities”? Why not seek “the line of least effort”?

The hypnotist reaches the subconscious mind by suggestion, and through the imagination—not the will—stimulates its health-restoring activities.

Tridon triumphantly declares that many experimenters “have come to the conclusion that we cannot suggest anything to a subject unless he unconsciously craves to do that very thing. Suggestions of unpleasant actions are either rejected or very ephemeral. Suggesting murder or suicide proves effective mainly in the movies. Lombroso saw his subjects wake up every time he ordered them to perform humiliating tasks or to assume degrading rôles” (Page 277).

Very good. No psycho-therapist would complain of the foregoing impeachment. The subject, whether he knows it or not, “unconsciously craves” to get well, to become strong, to throw off any neurosis which happens to afflict or disable him. The hypnotist suggests to the subconscious mind that what the subject unconsciously craves can be obtained, that it is being obtained, through the creative power of imagination, of auto-suggestion, supplemented and strengthened, if need be, by the direct suggestions or “commands” of the hypnotist.

No doubt there are cases, especially of deep-seated hysteria and neurosis, where analysis would be a more satisfactory method of treatment than hypnosis or suggestive therapeutics. Dr. Davis has tried both, and still employs either method, according to the diagnosis. Mr. Tridon was experienced only as an analyst. But he points out that Freud, who studied hypnotism under Charcot of Salpétrière and Bernheim and Liébault of Nancy, finally discarded the hypnotic method entirely. “It was while studying a patient in hypnotic ‘trance’ that Freud suspected the possibility of a study of the unconscious in the waking state,” says Tridon. I need merely remark in passing that the methods (and principles) of Charcot have also been “discarded” by practically all modern hypnotists, and the methods of Bernheim and Liébault much improved upon by later students—some of them, like Freud, pupils of these pioneer psycho-therapists.

But did Freud “discard” suggestion?

As a matter of fact, the patient who applies for treatment at the clinic of a psycho-analyst is under suggestion before he arrives. He has been assured by someone that the analyst can relieve him of his ailment, or that under the analysis his complaint will disappear. He has faith in the psycho-analytic method; he imagines himself being cured of his obsessions or complexes. His subconscious is already at work—stimulated by auto-suggestion—before he has his first interview. He is already on the road to recovery. Tridon to the contrary notwithstanding, there is a relationship between suggestion and psycho-analysis.

Tridon says (Page 280): “Jung says very frankly somewhere that practitioners who manage to invest themselves with the halo of the medicine man are wise in every respect. Not only do they have a large practice but they also obtain the best results. Dealing with neurotics, the medical exorcist shows to his subjects his full valuation of the ‘psychic’ element when he gives them an opportunity to fasten their faith to his mysterious personality.”

Realizing that the great psycho-analyst Jung has virtually (if unconsciously) returned to the basic principles of suggestive therapeutics, Tridon tells us that he disagrees with Jung “as to the final, not temporary, results of such cures.” But why this gratuitous injection of the word “temporary”? If “such cures” were merely “temporary,” as against proved permanent cures, would Dr. Jung, out of his wealth of experience, commend the “halo of the medicine man” as “wise in every respect”? I think not. Years of practical experience have taught Jung the great value of faith—and imagination—as a creative curative agency, acting by auto-suggestion on the subconscious personality: and he admits that the “medical exorcist” should show “to his subjects his full valuation of the ‘psychic’ element” when he gives them “an opportunity to fasten their faith to his mysterious personality.”

At the base of all successful psycho-therapeutic treatment lies faith, a form of creative imagination. So long as the “fame” of Jesus reached the ears of the sick and “tormented” “throughout all Syria,” “he healed them” (Matt. ix, 23, 24). But when he returned to his native countryside, where his “fame” as a healer was either unknown or discredited in advance, where he found no faith, “he could do no mighty work” (Mark, VI).[6]

[6] The reader who desires full information—full data—on all the points merely touched upon in this little book, would do well to consult Louis Satow’s “Hypnotism and Suggestion”, previously referred to—by far the most scholarly work so far published in English on this important subject.

CHAPTER 5.
SUGGESTION AND THE MASSES

The important rôle of suggestion in relation to social, religious and political phenomena is only beginning to be generally recognized. Louis Satow has performed a very useful service in emphasizing this aspect of the subject. As he so well points out, “many of the ideas and conceptions which the individual believes himself to have adopted independently and without constraint are no more than the effect of the mass mind, which manifests itself in manners and customs and education. On the other hand, the individual mind, especially that of the leader, investigator or moralist, has a stimulating effect upon the mind of the crowd.”

The mind of the crowd exercises, in certain directions, a beneficial effect upon the progress of civilization, while in many other cases the opinions of the crowd tend to obstruct the development of the more progressively-minded individuals. The modern national arrogance and national egoism, factional exclusiveness, religious bigotry, etc., “once more plainly demonstrate that it will be long indeed before the mass mentality corresponds with the highest humanity and its many-sided intellectual culture.”

Altogether too many individuals, from whom one might reasonably expect better things, fall a prey to mass suggestion—or, less elegantly, “follow the band-wagon.” The better-educated individual, as a member of the crowd, often acts in direct opposition to what are normally his own feelings and opinions.

It is doubtful, however, if persons of real culture ever so far succumb to mob psychology as to join in tar-and-feather parties, assaults upon working-class gatherings, or lynchings and mass atrocities. The power of suggestion in such cases is, no doubt, very strong, especially in its influence upon persons whose moral foundations are not too sound, causing them to be carried away from their moorings by the more or less contagious mob psychology. Men who are, as individuals, naturally cowards, are apt to take advantage of the feeling of invincible power conferred upon them for the moment by the solidarity of the crowd, fused into a psychological unit. In many so-called “civilized” human beings the instincts of the brute lie not very far from the surface, only awaiting an opportunity when it will be safe to release impulses bordering upon the sadistic.

“Merely as a result of the imitative instinct,” remarks Satow, “which is innate in man, and plays a great part even in the animal world, the crowd displays a much greater susceptibility to suggestion than the individual.”

We must admit with Bechterow that, “without knowing it, until we reach a certain level we acquire for ourselves the emotions, superstitious ideas, opinions, tendencies, intentions and even singularities of character of the individuals with whom we most commonly associate.”

The power of the press to produce a desired frame of public mind, merely by the endless repetition of certain carefully chosen phrases, was well illustrated before and during the World War. The masses are inclined to believe anything which is suggested with sufficient force and continued repetition. The principle was well understood by the crafty old politician Cato, who, as is well known, concluded all his public speeches with the phrase, “Delenda est Carthago” (Carthage must be destroyed). Today we are quite familiar with equally effective slogans, endlessly repeated. The mere name of a candidate for political office on the wind-shield of countless automobiles is but a form of suggestion—and it works! It is the device alike of demagogue and plutogogue, of progressive and reactionary. Mass suggestion everywhere; whether in peace or in war; in politics or in religion!

Many phenomena—political, social or religious institutions—can be understood only in the light of suggestion—suggestive compulsion. But here let me quote an eloquent and instructive passage from Satow’s chapter on hypnosis and suggestion in religion (which the reader would find it well worth while to consult):

“From the lowest forms of religion—from the belief in magic [its earliest phase], animism, fetichism, daemons and spirits, by way of polytheism, to monotheism, and even beyond; beneath the embittered spiritual and material conflict between the various religions, confessions, sects and philosophies, an eternally tedious and extremely involved development has taken place, which has often led to the most grievous errors and abuses. But without the omnipotent factors of hypnosis and suggestion the psychological processes of this religious evolution will always be a riddle. But for an insight into the peculiar medley of the spiritual attributes of humanity, which, in addition to, and in spite of, its intelligence exhibits an almost morbid credulity and incapacity to form an independent opinion; but for the hysterical excitability of the nervous system; but for the phenomena of auto-hypnosis and auto-suggestion, mass susceptibility and mass hallucination, religious belief would remain utterly inexplicable. Whether we consider the Indian yogis, the Buddhist priests, the Egyptian, Chinese, or Persian sages, the pagan, or Jewish, or Christian hierarchies, and whether the events in question occurred in a hoary antiquity or only yesterday, the picture is always the same: the masses, by all possible means, are kept in bondage to superstition and ignorance, and then a net of suggestion is dropped over their heads, so that the power of priestcraft may be maintained.... By most people the dangers of ecclesiastical suggestion are either underestimated or are simply not recognized at all.”

Throughout the long history of man’s inhumanity to man, we see in operation the forces of hypnotism and suggestion. Prof. Otto Stoll, while recognizing, for example, that the Crusades had their roots in economic and political, as well as religious, conditions, nevertheless contends that “all the attempts of the historians to point to movements of this character as the logical consequence of the motive forces issuing from the ephemeral but universal conditions of the age, are powerless to explain, in a satisfactory manner, without the all-significant factor of suggestibility, either their extent or the direction which they assumed.”

The direction which the piety of the Crusades at the first capture of Jerusalem took was to tear babes from the breasts of “infidel” mothers and dash their brains out against the walls; to ravish every woman seized; rip open the abdomens of men to see whether they had swallowed any money; drive the Jews into their synagogues and burn them to death; slaughter others even in the churches; and massacre in all 70,000 men, women and children—“for Christ’s sake.” An archbishop chronicles with evident satisfaction: “Surely have these things happened in accordance with the righteous judgment of God.”[7]

[7] Quoted by Satow, Op. cit., Pages 191-92.

Such are the fruits of mass suggestion! Nor need we go back to the Middle Ages for examples. Some of us still remember the Ludlow massacre, the Everett mass-murder, and other exhibitions of “idealism” and “patriotism” under suggestion.

Now comes Mr. William Jennings Bryan reiterating daily through the press and on the platform that the theory of evolution is based upon the “mere unsupported guesses of biologists and psychologists,” and that only men and women who accept “the word of God”—as revealed in the Book of Genesis—are fit to teach in our schools and colleges. By the law of suggestion, acting on minds with as little knowledge of science as is possessed by “the great commoner” himself, a wave of reaction is sweeping the country; and nine states have already made “Bible reading” compulsory in our public schools. The end in view is, of course, to suggest to the rising generation that the so-called Books of Moses are authoritative works of science, derived directly from Jehovah. Meanwhile, Mr. William Sunday has been appealing to a still lower order of intelligence with his assertion that “Charles Darwin is in hell,” and suggesting that all who accept the doctrine of evolution in preference to the legends of the ancient Babylonians, Assyrians and Armenians are destined to join him in a hell quite unknown to these ancient poets and chroniclers.[8]

[8] The writers of the Old Testament speak only of “Sheol” (Job X, 21)—a great pit under the earth, derived from the Babylonian “Arallu” and akin to the Greek “Hades”, where the spirits of the dead—good, bad or indifferent—went. “Hell-fire” and “brimstone” are a much later invention.

It has been alleged by many prominent writers of the day that a movement is on foot to arouse a spirit of militarism in the United States, in the interest of imperialist finance, which, it is pointed out, needs a strong army and navy. Can it be that we are being prepared—by suggestion—for the next “war to end war”? Let us hope that this fear is groundless, that “Defense Day” meant only what it was asserted to mean, and not—“Delenda est Carthago”! It would surely be deplorable if a war psychology were permitted to gain even the smallest momentum. Otherwise the few lessons learned from the recent World War would soon be lost in a deluge of suggestive propaganda.

“Over and over again,” truly remarks Satow, “has the question been asked: How was it that the war was so terribly widespread, the armies so enormous? Of course, numerous well-founded reasons have been found—historical, political and economic—but none of them suffices unless we take into account the great, the truly powerful factor: Mass Suggestion!... The partial and exaggerated sense of nationality, national arrogance and national covetousness, on which the mass suggestion thrives so exuberantly, furnish a fruitful soil for the war mentality.”

CHAPTER 6.
HYPNOTISM AND PERSONALITY

Attention has already been directed to F. W. H. Myers’ theory of a conscious and a subconscious intelligence—a duality of mind in each individual. Hypnotism and suggestion operates mostly—and in the final analysis only—on the subconscious mind.

We have seen how the Countess deLaval could speak fluently the language of Brittany when under hypnotic sleep, but knew nothing of Breton when awake—i.e., the language was known only to her subconscious mind, the seat of memory. Hansen, the Danish hypnotist, having hypnotized an English officer, was astonished to hear him break forth in a tongue unknown to him. Later it was learned that the language was Welsh, which the officer had heard spoken as a child, but which his conscious mind had long forgotten. The fact that old people often recall occurrences of many years ago, but forget forthwith an event of but yesterday, has often been commented upon. All of these phenomena are readily understood in the light of Myers’ theory of dual intelligence—duality of mind.

The foregoing theory also makes explicable the frequently reported cases of amnesia, or of dissociation; i.e., the breaking up of consciousness into parts which lead separate (independent) existences, or what is commonly known as double, or multiple, personality. Dr. Davis recalls the rather recent case of an elderly gentleman, of good position, who was accused of having sent offensive anonymous letters to a young lady, charging her with thieving, drunkenness, immorality, etc. So strong was the evidence against him that he was committed to jail, and was later admitted to bail only on the condition that he should not come within forty miles of the city. “At the eleventh hour it was discovered by the merest chance that the young woman had unconsciously written these most abusive letters to herself, and on receiving them in her normal state of mind knew absolutely nothing about their authorship.”[9]

[9] Davis, “Hypnotism and Treatment by Suggestion”, Page 41.

The reader may remember the case of Claire Beauclaire, of Brockton, Massachusetts—made public in 1922—who possessed two distinct personalities, one that of an apparently normal girl of eighteen years, the other that of a child of five. Better known, however, is the case of Bernice Redick, of Cleveland, Ohio, a high school graduate, with a decided love for music. In the midst of a conversation she suddenly nodded, fell into sleep for a moment, then awoke. But during this moment she had “slipped back” fifteen years, as far as her mind was concerned.

The girl was taken to Columbus, and placed under the care of Dr. Henry Herbert Goddard, alienist, head of the Ohio Bureau for Juvenile Research.

Asked her name, she told Dr. Goddard that it was “Polly.” “How old are you?” inquired the alienist. “I am four years old,” she replied. Mentally, she was indeed but a child of four. She could neither read nor write, and knew nothing of music, of which she was formerly so apt a pupil. She could not even distinguish colors by name, merely exhibiting the childish desire for bright ones. She could not count above ten. Her chief diversion was sitting on the floor playing with dolls. But she did not remain “Polly” for long at a time. “During her first day,” says Dr. Goddard, “she changed from Polly to Bernice and back eleven times. The reversion was just as sudden one way as the other, and just as inexplicable.”

Psycho-analysts would explain the case by assuming that the girl had been unhappy at home, or had had an unfortunate love affair, and wished to escape from reality—to have an easier time by becoming someone else. If this were the real explanation, why change so frequently back to Bernice?

Dr. Goddard was at a loss to know how to proceed. There were at that time fewer than 25 such cases in the medical records of the world. Any competent hypnotist could have prescribed the appropriate remedy; but probably hypnotism was not in good repute among the physicians consulted. At any rate. Dr. Goddard adopted the plan of bringing Polly up to her normal age and previous intellectual status by educating her as he would any other four-year-old child—for the Binet test showed Polly to possess normal intelligence for a child of that age. “We thought,” he explained, “that by bringing Polly’s mentality up to the age of Bernice the two personalities might automatically become one.”

Eventually, as we shall see, he had to resort to hypnotism after all; but first he tried this educational plan. Polly was first taught to read, which she learned more readily than most four-year-old children. The usual kindergarten courses were included in the curriculum. The lessons, however, were frequently interrupted by the reappearance of Bernice, who knew nothing of any such person as Polly. The dissociation was complete.

As this case has never appeared in book form anywhere, let us quote Dr. Goddard’s own words:

“One day, when Polly was engrossed in a conversation with an attendant, a pencil was placed in her hand, and she was told to write a letter to a nurse she liked. A magazine, held between her hand and her eyes, kept her from seeing the paper on which she wrote. The conversation continued and kept her attention from the letter, but her hand moved mechanically across the paper, and the letter was finished. It was a letter such as would be written by almost any girl of ten or twelve years.

“When it was finished we showed it to her, and then asked suddenly, ‘How old are you, Polly?’

“‘I am eleven years old,’ she replied instantly.

“From then on she consistently admitted being eleven years old. Success seemed to have crowned our efforts.

“When she awoke as ‘Polly,’ she at first, each time, became the four-year-old ‘Polly’ we had originally known, but in a few minutes passed to the eleven-year-old stage. These transitions were frequent and irregular. One day as she was preparing to go for a walk she suddenly changed to ‘Polly.’ She remained thus for six days, babbling and playing as any child would. Bernice reasserted herself at about the same hour of the day, whereupon the girl began looking about for her coat to go for the walk, resuming her conversation with the words she was saying when ‘Polly’ drove her out.

“Having brought her to the age of eleven we continued the treatment until she admitted she was fourteen. Then we held a party, celebrating her fifteenth birthday, with candles and presents. A succession of birthdays followed within a few weeks, the girl apparently not realizing that she was being tricked. At last she became nineteen and admitted that was her age.”

But the automatic fusion of the two personalities expected by Dr. Goddard did not occur. Bernice was quiet and modest, reserved, timid and ambitious. “Polly” was careless, boisterous, disobedient, and “hail fellow well met” with everyone.

“Just as Dr. Jekyll in the story gave way more and more readily to the encroachments of Mr. Hyde, so did Bernice give way more and more readily to the self-assertive ‘Polly.’ Even yet, when she awoke, she was often ‘four years old,’ and had to pass through the successive stages, which she now did very rapidly.”

After months of educational work, without success in merging the two personalities into a unified Bernice, hypnotic treatment was introduced at last—a modified form of mesmerism—with a view to driving out “Polly.”

“Both personalities were told of the existence of the other, but each knew of it only as a normal person would know of someone he had heard of but never seen. ‘Polly’ in particular declared there was no such thing, and that if there was she had no room for her. Later she said Bernice was a friend that I had told her about, who was coming to see her some time.

“Hypnotism again came into play. I placed ‘Polly’ in a sleep, first telling her that she was going to meet Bernice. Somewhere the two minds met, in one of the strangest introductions I ever hope to make. It was, of course, impossible to observe any reaction that took place, as our only method of observation was of necessity through bodily actions, and for the time being there were none.

“Awakening, ‘Polly’ said she remembered Bernice, but that she lived in Cleveland, and would come down to see her some time. She resented the idea that she might be stealing Bernice’s body, but declared that this was her own, and she had always possessed it. Polly was banished by hypnotism and Bernice came into control. She, too, remembered the strange introduction. From that time, however, there was a conscious effort by each personality to drive out the other. ‘Polly’ was very strong. Even with the aid of hypnotic influence, which I called upon to banish ‘Polly’ at every appearance, it has been difficult going for Bernice.

“The mental aspect of the case has been closely related to the physical. When the body was fatigued, ‘Polly’ nearly always came into power. After a night’s sleep the girl nearly always awoke as Bernice.

“Now, although we have established Bernice permanently, it must be admitted ‘Polly’ may yet gain permanent control.”

On January 12, 1923, Dr. Goddard announced through the daily press that “Polly has not appeared for nearly a month.”

Later there seem to have been relapses, in which a third personality appeared, “living,” Dr. Goddard was quoted in the press (March 7th) as saying, “only in the imagination of ‘Polly.’” On this date it was announced that Miss Redick would be discharged from the Ohio State University Hospital a week later as permanently restored to her normal self.

This case bears many interesting likenesses to the famous case of “Miss Beauchamp,” reported by Dr. Morton Prince in his “The Dissociation of a Personality.” The intrusive personality, younger but not a child, was here known as “Sally.” “Sally” hated “Miss Beauchamp,” between whom and herself there existed the same differences of temperament as between “Polly” and Bernice. She would play tricks on her—walk miles into the country and wake up as “Miss Beauchamp,” without carfare home (“Miss Beauchamp” disliked to walk); pile up the furniture, climb on top, and let “Miss Beauchamp” climb down; write abusive letters for the other personality to find, tangle her embroidery silks, etc. “Sally,” like “Polly,” was finally “murdered” by being hypnotized out of existence. In this case, however, “Miss Beauchamp” herself was not the original, normal personality; but a final fusion into the normal woman was finally achieved.

From this brief study the power and scope of hypnotism and suggestion may be comprehended—their value in the hands of a skilled physician, their danger in the hands of a charlatan. As a herald of their use and a warning against their disuse, let me conclude by quoting the opening stanza of Browning’s poem, “Mesmerism”:

All I believed is true!

I am able yet

All I want, to get

By a method as strange as new:

Dare I trust the same to you?

Entrusted to the exploitation of a showman, the subconscious may avenge its abuse in a grievous manner; but entrusted to the understanding sympathy of a trained and experienced practitioner, there is no more efficacious alleviant for many of the ills to which the body is subject than the hypnotic or suggestive method of treatment.

Transcriber’s Note:

Erroneously placed or missing quotation marks or punctuation have been silently corrected.

The following printer error has been changed:

- p. 39: “implictly” changed to “implicitly” (implicitly believe they have founded on fact)

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HYPNOTISM MADE PLAIN ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516, Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

Table of Contents

- Hypnotism Made Plain
- CONTENTS
- INTRODUCTION
- CHAPTER 1. A RETROSPECT
- CHAPTER 2. MODERN HYPNOTIC METHODS
- CHAPTER 3. PHENOMENA OF HYPNOTISM
- CHAPTER 4. HYPNOTISM AND PSYCHO-ANALYSIS
- CHAPTER 5. SUGGESTION AND THE MASSES
- CHAPTER 6. HYPNOTISM AND PERSONALITY
- Transcriber’s Note:
- THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE