Название | The concept of hypnosis: a scientific approach |
---|---|
Автор произведения | Андрей Тихомиров |
Жанр | |
Серия | |
Издательство | |
Год выпуска | 2024 |
isbn |
"Stigmata, stigmata (from the Greek – stigma, stigmatos – prick, scar, spot, sign) – redness of the skin, bruises or ulcers that involuntarily appear on the body of some deeply religious people in those places where, according to the biblical myth, the crucified Christ had wounds from a new crown and nails. The appearance of stigmata was considered by the church as a miracle and was used to incite religious fanaticism. Modern science has established that stigmatization is based on an increased tendency to self-suggestion and morbid sensitivity inherent in patients with hysteria. Cases of skin changes under the influence of suggestion and autosuggestion (imaginary burn, imaginary bruise, etc.) are known in medicine and are explained by the fact that each part of the body is connected by nerve conductors through the spinal cord and subcortex to the cerebral cortex. Under certain conditions, changes in the normal state of the nervous system can cause metabolic disorders in tissues, expressed in redness or swelling of the skin, etc. anomalies. This mechanism also underlies stigmata" (Tikhomirov A.E. The origin of words and signs. The Science of superstition, "Ridero", Yekaterinburg, 2017, pp. 138-139).
Hypnosis in some cases, as well as sleep, helps to restore and improve nervous activity. As a result of a short-term hypnotic state, the activity of the cerebral cortex improves, associative processes are facilitated, attention and memory functions increase. Hypnotic inhibition promotes the restoration of vital processes in tissues and body systems, improves the performance of tired muscles. A detailed analysis of the phenomena of hypnosis made it possible for the first time to scientifically substantiate the previously mysterious phenomena of hypnotic states. The disclosure of the phases of hypnosis contributed to the understanding and rational treatment of sleep disorders, often observed in various diseases. Pavlov's teaching on sleep and hypnosis also provides a scientific basis for a proper understanding of deeper disorders of higher nervous activity in nervous and mental diseases and helps to find effective methods of their treatment.
Hypnosis can be used with favorable results in the treatment of predominantly functional nervous diseases without organic lesions of the central nervous system. These include obsessive states, hysteria, etc. Hypnosis is successfully used in the treatment of alcoholism and drug addiction. Hypnosis is contraindicated in psychoses, especially those occurring with delirium, as well as in the presence of an attraction to hypnosis, which acquires a pathological character. Hypnotic suggestion is widely used in obstetric practice in order to anesthetize childbirth, as well as in surgery and dentistry. Favorable cases of the cure of certain skin diseases with the help of appropriate hypnotic suggestion are described.
The technique of hypnosis for therapeutic purposes is very diverse. Many people use passes performed near the face of the hypnotized person, or light stroking of the face and body. Another technique is to fix a shiny object with your eyes for a long time. The main method should be considered the verbal suggestion of ideas about developing drowsiness. With this method, the patient is convinced in a calm, even, monotonous voice that he will fall asleep, that he is sleepy, that he is falling asleep.
From the history of hypnosis
The words hypnosis and hypnotism both come from the term neurohypnosis (nervous sleep), they were all coined by Etienne Felix d'Henin de Cuvilliers in the 1820s. The term hypnosis comes from the Greek ὑπνος hypnos, "sleep", and the suffix -ωσις -osis, or from ὑπνόω hypnooō, "put to sleep" (the basis of aorist hypnōs-) and the suffix -is. These words were popularized in English by the Scottish surgeon James Brade (to whom they are sometimes mistakenly attributed) around 1841. Braid based his practice on a method developed by Franz Mesmer and his followers (which was called "mesmerism" or "animal magnetism"), but differed in his theory as to how the procedure worked. In ancient Russia, hypnosis was called "enchantment", and hypnotized people were called "charmed" or "enchanted".
Abbot Faria, a Catholic monk, was one of the pioneers of the scientific study of hypnosis, continuing the work of Franz Mesmer. Unlike Mesmer, who claimed that hypnosis was mediated by "animal magnetism," Faria believed that it worked solely through the power of suggestion. Soon hypnosis began to find its way into the world of modern medicine. The use of hypnosis in the medical field has become popular thanks to surgeons and therapists such as Elliotson and James Esdale, and researchers such as James Brade, who have helped uncover the biological and physical benefits of hypnosis. According to his writings, Brade began to hear reports of various Oriental meditation practices shortly after the publication of his first publication on hypnosis, Neuropnology (1843). He first discussed some of these Oriental practices in a series of articles entitled Magic, Mesmerism, Hypnotism, etc., from a historical and physiological point of view. He drew analogies between his own practice of hypnosis and various forms of Hindu yogic meditation, and other ancient spiritual practices, especially those involving voluntary burial and apparent hibernation of a person. Brade's interest in these practices stems from his study of Dabistan-i Mazahib, the "School of Religions", an ancient Persian text describing a wide range of Eastern religious rituals, beliefs and practices. Although he completely rejected the transcendental or metaphysical interpretation given to these phenomena, Braid acknowledged that these descriptions of Oriental practices confirm his opinion that the effects of hypnosis can be produced alone, without the presence of anyone else (as he had already proved to his own satisfaction by experiments that he conducted in November 1841); and he saw correlations between many "metaphysical" Oriental practices and his own "rational" neurohypnotism, and completely rejected all the fluid theories and magnetic practices of the Mesmerists.
Avicenna (980-1037), a Persian physician, documented the characteristics of the state of "trance" (hypnotic trance) in 1027. Hypnosis was rarely used as a medical device at that time; the German physician Franz Mesmer reintroduced it in the 18th century.
Franz Mesmer (1734-1815) believed that there is a magnetic force or "fluid" in the universe, called "animal magnetism", which affects the health of the human body. He experimented with magnets to influence this field to induce healing. By about 1774, he came to the conclusion that the same effect could be created by passing his hands in front of the subject's body, which would later be called "Mesmeric Passes".
In 1784, at the request of King Louis XVI, two royal commissions on animal magnetism were specifically commissioned (separately) to investigate the claims of a certain Charles d'Eslon (1750-1786), a disgruntled disciple of Mesmer, about the existence of an essential (and not metaphorical, as Mesmer assumed) "animal magnetism", "magnetic animal", and similarly a physical "magnetic fluid", "magnetic liquid". Among the researchers were scientist Antoine Lavoisier, electricity and terrestrial magnetism expert Benjamin Franklin and pain relief expert Joseph-Ignace Guillotin.
The members of the Commission investigated d'Eslon's practice; and, although they unconditionally admitted that Mesmer's "cures" were indeed "cures," they did not investigate whether (or not) Mesmer initiated these "cures". Notably, in their studies of the d'Eslon procedures, they conducted an extensive series of randomized controlled trials, the experimental protocols of which were developed by Lavoisier, including the use of both "fictitious" and "genuine" procedures and, importantly, the first use of "blindfolding" for both researchers and their subjects.
As a result of their investigations, both Commissions concluded that there was no evidence to support d'Eslon's claim of the substantial physical existence of either his alleged "animal magnetism" or his alleged "magnetic