Hypnosis, Play and Religion - a Study of Illusion
Hypnosis, Play and Religion - a Study of Illusion
The theory is proposed that play is the correct model for Hypnosis. Examples are quoted from Johan Huizinga's "Homo Ludens" in support of this theory. Evolutionary Psychology is cited which suggests that play is a distinct mechanism within the brain. Two examples of role-playing which have influenced the author's thinking are described and the author concludes by constructing a table linking the "Phenomena" of Hypnosis, Play and Religion.
Arthur Askey, the late British comedian, used to begin every performance with the words "Hello playmates", thus demonstrating a profound understanding of the relationship between a performer and his audience. The reaction of an audience is very important to an understanding of hypnosis as I propose to demonstrate later.
It is my melancholy duty to play the part of the spoil-sport, for if Hypnosis is a game (and I think it is), then hitherto core concepts such as suggestions, are only play arrangements, and hypnotisability the subject's willingness to play with the hypnotist.
Cosmides and Tooby (1992) in The Adapted Mind , a book on evolutionary psychology, describe their experiments and conclude (p.220) that they:
"....undermine the proposition that the evolved architecture of the human mind contains a single 'reasoning faculty' that is function-general and content-free. Instead, they support the contrary contention that human reasoning is governed by a diverse collection of evolved mechanisms, many of which are functionally specialised, domain-specific, content-imbued and content-imparting. According to this contrary view, situations involving threat, social exchange, hazard, rigid-object mechanics, contagion, and so on, each activate different sets of functionally specialised procedures that exploit the recurrent properties of the corresponding domain in a way that would have produced an efficacious solution under Pleistocene conditions. On this view, the human mind would more closely resemble an intricate network of functionally dedicated computers than a single general-purpose computer."
Boulton and Smith (1992, pp429-444) see play as being one of these functionally specialised mechanisms leading to compromise and cooperation. All I want you, the reader and audience, to take from all this is that in terms of evolutionary psychology, play is a specific mechanism within the brain.
Three years ago I presented a paper which linked religion and hypnosis to the verb 'to be' and I suggested that play was the correct model for hypnosis, a view pioneered by Sarbin (1989) over 50 years ago. There are five criteria of Play which fit exactly with hypnosis, namely that both are an altered state of consciousness, involving role playing, childlike behaviour, imagination and that both are naturalistic. Occam's Razor demands that "entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity," so it makes sense that, in all probability, Play and Hypnosis are identical. It was with such thoughts in mind that I first came across Johan Huizinga's book Homo Ludens and it is to introduce the reader to his work that this paper is intended, for I think it confirms the hypothesis.
In paediatric hypnosis it is standard practice, during the induction phase, to ask the subject to pretend. Every child knows what is being asked of him because his whole world is spent in pretence and play. He must know that this is play and he immediately complies. When we use the word pretend in adult circumstances the connotations are quite different. To adults the word pretend has implications of fraud, falsity, deception and simulation. And here we have a crucial difference which I think is the cause of much misunderstanding and mis-appreciation of what is actually going on in adult practice. As Huizinga (1949, p8) says:
"...for the adult and responsible human being play is a function which he could equally well leave alone. Play is superfluous. The need for it is only urgent to the extent that the enjoyment of it makes a need. Play can be deferred or suspended at any time. " It is precisely, I think, this loss of play in adulthood which has made us strangers to the truth. It probably explains why there is no correlation between 'hypnotisability' in adults and having had an imaginary friend as a child. Could it be that the child who experiences freedom in play is well integrated conceptually and does not feel the need to play as an adult, whereas the child from a play-disturbed background has not achieved such integration and is more prone to fantasy and is more "hypnotisable" when grown up?"
(This speculation about children and play I would not now endorse. It derives from an article I once read which found a correlation between hypnotisability in adults and previous child abuse. The difficulty is that highly hypnotisable subjects can easily be persuaded to give a story of child abuse, which cannot subsequently be corroborated.
Experience with the False Memory Syndrome has now cast doubt on the correlation and I now think it false, in that high hypnotisables give a story of child abuse and not the other way round.)
The exceptional and special position of play is most tellingly illustrated by the fact that it loves to surround itself with an air of secrecy. Even in early childhood the charm of play is enhanced by making a 'secret' out of it. This is for us, not for the 'others'. What the 'others' do 'outside' is no concern of ours at the moment. Inside the circle of the game the laws and customs of ordinary life no longer count. We are different and do things differently."
Could we here be reading a description of the various hypnosis societies? On p.13 we read:
"The child is making an image of something different, something more beautiful, or more sublime, more dangerous than what he usually is. One is a Prince, or one is Daddy, a wicked witch, or a tiger. The child is quite literally 'beside himself' with delight, transported beyond himself to such an extent that he almost believes he actually is such and such a thing, without wholly losing consciousness of 'ordinary reality'. His representation is not so much a sham-reality, as a realisation in appearance: 'imagination' in the original sense of the word."
I am struck in this description with the parallels to be found both in hypnosis where the subject will burst into unexpected laughter, and in religion, where pentecostalists burst into laughter and delight - the phenomenon called the "Toronto Blessing".
Huizinga defines Play (p28) as:
"...a voluntary activity or occupation executed within certain fixed limits of time and place, according to rules freely accepted, but absolutely binding, having its aim in itself and accompanied by a feeling of tension, joy and the consciousness that it is 'different' from 'ordinary life'."
Does this sound like a definition of hypnosis? Hardly. Actually it is a fair definition of a game and it begins to make sense when one realises that hypnosis is a game involving relaxation and not a feeling of tension.
I hope you, the reader and audience, will bear with me while I put in place a number of the building blocks in my argument.
The first example of role-playing I want to describe briefly. At a conference I attended in 1987 I took part in a role-playing exercise conducted by Lifschitz and Fourie, two South African psychologists, well known for their systems approach to hypnosis. I well remember my astonishment when my "wife" agreed to go into hypnosis in role. Thought I: " Even I am not daft enough to believe that someone who does not exist, can be hypnotised." Then I thought again: "Your attribution is all wrong. It's Margaret (I think that was her real name) who's being hypnotised and no one else." I remember being shaken when I realised that surely this role within a role must be the model for Possession." I want you, the reader and audience, to be clear about this. Here we had a woman who was becoming hypnotised and then becoming my wife (who doesn't exist).
By way of preamble to the second example of role playing can I repeat what I said elsewhere, (Houston 1993), that hypnosis can be seen as the experiencing of a story in the present tense; that the story is our beliefs and expectations and that much of human mental anguish occurs when the things that happen to us do not accord with the story.
Later on Huizinga says (p 8):
"...play is not 'ordinary' or 'real' life. It is rather a stepping out of 'real' life into a temporary sphere of activity with a disposition all of its own. Every child knows perfectly well that he is 'only pretending', or that it was 'only for fun'. How deep-seated this awareness is in the child's soul is strikingly illustrated by the following story, told to me by the father of the boy in question. He found his four year old son sitting at the front of a row of chairs playing 'trains'. As he hugged him the boy said: 'Don't kiss the engine, daddy, or the carriages won't think it's real.' This only pretending quality of play betrays a consciousness of the inferiority of play compared with 'seriousness' - a feeling that seems to be something as primary as play itself.
Nevertheless, as we have already pointed out, the consciousness of play being 'only a pretend' does not by any means prevent it from proceeding with the utmost seriousness, with an absorption, a devotion that passes into rapture and, temporarily at least, completely abolishes that troublesome 'only' feeling."
Again, (p9), he says:
"Play begins and then at a certain moment it is 'over'. It plays itself to an end."
The Mass begins with "In the name of the Father" and ends with "Go, the Mass is ended"; the referee's whistle begins and ends the game. Contrast this with the hypnotic process which starts with the induction and finishes with the final ritual of waking.
Later on, (p10), he says:
"All play moves and has its being within a playground marked off beforehand either materially or ideally, deliberately or as a matter of course. Just as there is no formal difference between play and ritual, so the 'consecrated spot' cannot be formally distinguished from the playground. The arena, the card-table, the magic circle, the temple, the stage, the screen, the tennis court, the court of justice, etc., all are in form and function, play-grounds, i.e. forbidden spots, isolated, hedged round, hallowed, within which special rules obtain. All are temporary worlds within the ordinary world dedicated to the performance of an act apart.... Play demands order, absolute and supreme. The least deviation from it 'spoils the game', robs it of its character and makes it worthless."
Could we not have here a description of hypnosis, which is played out in a consecrated spot, which is defined by the Society as being the consulting room of the doctor, dentist or psychologist - all others being forbidden?
Huizinga (p11) makes special mention of the spoilsport:
"All play has its rules. They determine what 'holds' in the temporary world circumscribed by play.... The player who trespasses against the rules, or ignores them, is a 'spoilsport'. The spoilsport is not the same as the false player, the cheat; for the latter pretends to be playing the game and, on the face of it still acknowledges a magic circle. It is curious to note how much more lenient society is to the cheat than to the spoilsport. This is because the spoilsport shatters the play world itself. By withdrawing from the game he reveals the relativity and fragility of the play-world in which he had temporarily shut himself with others. He robs play of its illusion - a pregnant word which means literally 'in play' (from inlusio, illudere or inludere). Therefore he must be cast out, for he threatens the existence of the play community."
The fate of the renegade hypnotist is not quite so severe. However, he is looked at askance. I remember being admonished by a pleasant young psychiatrist: "You people who keep asking what hypnosis is really annoy me. I don't care what it is just so long as my female patients can experience an orgasm."
Later, (p12):"The exceptional and special position of play is most tellingly illustrated by the fact that it loves to surround itself with an air of secrecy. Even in early childhood the charm of play is enhanced by making a 'secret' out of it. This is for us, not for the 'others'. What the 'others' do 'outside' is no concern of ours at the moment. Inside the circle of the game the laws and customs of ordinary life no longer count. We are different and do things differently."
Could we here be reading a description of the various hypnosis societies? On p.13 we read:
"The child is making an image of something different, something more beautiful, or more sublime, more dangerous than what he usually is. One is a Prince, or one is Daddy, a wicked witch, or a tiger. The child is quite literally 'beside himself' with delight, transported beyond himself to such an extent that he almost believes he actually is such and such a thing, without wholly losing consciousness of 'ordinary reality'. His representation is not so much a sham-reality, as a realisation in appearance: 'imagination' in the original sense of the word."
I am struck in this description with the parallels to be found both in hypnosis where the subject will burst into unexpected laughter, and in religion, where pentecostalists burst into laughter and delight - the phenomenon called the "Toronto Blessing".
Huizinga defines Play (p28) as:
"...a voluntary activity or occupation executed within certain fixed limits of time and place, according to rules freely accepted, but absolutely binding, having its aim in itself and accompanied by a feeling of tension, joy and the consciousness that it is 'different' from 'ordinary life'."
Does this sound like a definition of hypnosis? Hardly. Actually it is a fair definition of a game and it begins to make sense when one realises that hypnosis is a game involving relaxation and not a feeling of tension.
I hope you, the reader and audience, will bear with me while I put in place a number of the building blocks in my argument.
The first example of role-playing I want to describe briefly. At a conference I attended in 1987 I took part in a role-playing exercise conducted by Lifschitz and Fourie, two South African psychologists, well known for their systems approach to hypnosis. I well remember my astonishment when my "wife" agreed to go into hypnosis in role. Thought I: " Even I am not daft enough to believe that someone who does not exist, can be hypnotised." Then I thought again: "Your attribution is all wrong. It's Margaret (I think that was her real name) who's being hypnotised and no one else." I remember being shaken when I realised that surely this role within a role must be the model for Possession." I want you, the reader and audience, to be clear about this. Here we had a woman who was becoming hypnotised and then becoming my wife (who doesn't exist).
By way of preamble to the second example of role playing can I repeat what I said elsewhere, (Houston 1993), that hypnosis can be seen as the experiencing of a story in the present tense; that the story is our beliefs and expectations and that much of human mental anguish occurs when the things that happen to us do not accord with the story.
How can hypnosis be both play and a story? Imagine you are at the theatre watching the film Love Story. You are in tears. The heroine is dying from leukaemia. You have identified with her or her husband and family. In essence you have become that person. Suddenly a man appears on the stage, a spoilsport, and shouts to the audience: " Don't be silly, these are only shadows on a wall, they're only actors; the film was made years ago; there's no need to cry." Imagine the audience's response. They would shout back: " Boo! Get off the stage you stupid man. We know that. We're here for the willing suspension of disbelief." That is why, when we go to the theatre we talk of going to a play. Like a boy who has become a soldier in his play, you a member of the audience, have become the person you have identified with.
So I want to tell you a story about a story. I once attended a workshop being given by a dentist called Geoffrey Graham. I will never forget his words as he introduced his topic. He said: "It doesn't matter what the story is, as long as the patient believes it." These words are etched on my memory and I think they have a most profound significance as regards a true understanding of hypnosis. "Now," said Dr Graham, "Here's the story. The memory is like a tape recorder. It records everything... even back to early childhood and as far back as the womb. These memories can be recalled, unaltered, under hypnosis." You and I who have studied these things and who have heard John Kihlstrom, know that each of these elements to the story is false. But there is enough in it for the average person to believe it. Dr Graham's patients come along and he induces trance using a standard induction technique. He takes them back in time, in their imaginations, to their early childhood and even back into the womb and during childbirth. Typically patients who have asthma will experience the umbilical cord around their neck, or a feeling of breathlessness and being choked. Patients with depression or lack of self-esteem may report a conversation between their parents just after they have been delivered, in which dad is saying to mum, "Isn't she ugly, we really can't afford her, I wish we never had her, I wonder if we can give her away." Thus patients were bringing along their experiences of life and going into trance using a particular story as a frame-work. What Dr Geoffrey Graham (1986,1987,1988,1990) does is to record these confabulations and these have become the basis of several books.
Suddenly the cause of asthma becomes the cord about the neck and the cause of depression, being unwanted as a child. Dr Graham's work is valuable, not because it is true, (I don't think it is true), but because it represents a pseudology which could be reproduced by anyone interested in the subject. Here we have the origins of religion. His books are a pseudology based on the testament of his patients experiencing rebirthing. Could theology be a pseudology based on the testament of parishioners experiencing the idea of God?
Miller in The New Polytheism: Rebirth of the Gods and Goddesses. (1974, p25) wrote:
"For a couple of thousand years Greek religion did very well without theology. Then Plato invented it, or at least was the first to use the word theologia. Theology as we know it, "the science of divine things," is first mentioned in Plato's Republic, where the term may be translated 'what is said about the Gods.' But this translation does not do full justice to Plato's meaning, for he meant to imply a kind of thoughtful speaking about the Gods which was governed by the laws of systematic thinking."
If this conjecture is true then theology should be testable in a laboratory setting. Just feed the subject a story about a god and induce the subject to experience the story while in trance. Better still, see if he can be induced while in role as the god (see role playing above) and then you will get the story from the god's point of view. Record the subject's confabulations while in trance and the subject's post hypnotic rationalisations and one should have a reproducible and testable theology, particularly if the subject is naive about the god and the cult or culture associated with the god. Jung, eat your heart out!
Imagine my glee when investigating this aspect of my research to find that there was a Theology of Play (Moltmann1972). This seemed to me to be a complete vindication of this approach.
It occurred to me too, that the whole Christian story of death and resurrection is a function of age regression. You see, in order for someone to experience in the present, a man who has died, the theology demands a story of death and resurrection. Recent events in Elvis Presley's home town would tend to confirm this.
What I propose is a paradigm which takes the components or "phenomena" of hypnosis and compares them with the same components in religious experience and in play. Such a paradigm should lead to useful conclusions and predictions and to reproducibility of results. It is also capable of indefinite expansion to include such things as games and theatre, bearing in mind that it is the audience which is in trance. Research would require an approach based more on cultural anthropology, comparative religion and play, as well as clinical and experimental hypnosis.
The framework looks something like this, with columns and rows as indicated:
COMPONENT OF HYPNOSIS EQUIVALENT IN RELIGION EQUIVALENT IN PLAY
LAUGHTER TORONTO BLESSING LAUGHTER
MISATTRIBUTION NON NOBIS DOMINE OUIJA, OLIVER
MUSIC MUSIC MUSIC
IMAGINATION IMAGES IMAGINATION
RELIEF OF PAIN RELIEF OF SUFFERING KISS IT BETTER
REFRAMING REFRAMING CHILDHOOD
HIDDEN OBSERVER GUARDIAN ANGEL ?
EXPERIMENTAL GODS IMAGINARY FRIEND
TRANCE LOGIC I BELIEVE BECAUSE TOLERANCE OF
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE INCONGRUITY
OVERREACTION ACTING SHOWING OFF
POST HYPNOTIC SUGGESTION RELIGIOUS MURDERS MONICA SELES
AMNESIA Isaiah Ch.65 v.17 TENNIS SCORE
POSITIVE HALLUCINATIONS VISIONS MONSTERS
NEGATIVE HALLUCINATIONS EMPTY TOMB EDWARD
ROLE IN ROLE POSSESSION BECOMING
COMPLIANCE ATTENDANCE AT MASS AFL/SUPER LEAGUE
BELIEF/MAKE BELIEF BELIEF MAKE BELIEF
METAPHOR LORD WAY LIGHT MASTER KING WALLY
BECOMING EXODUS 3 v.14 YOU BE SUPERMAN
AUTHORITY/LEGITIMACY POPE/AYATOLLAH KEN ARTHURSON
MYSTERY MYSTERY MYSTERY
TRANSFERENCE PRIEST FATHER/MOTHER
PLAYMATE
LEGITIMACY APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION ARL
DEPTH DEPTH OF BELIEF INVOLVEMENT
CUING TING OF BELL REFEREE'S WHISTLE
MOOD ECSTASY/RAPTURE DELIGHT
PERCEPTION BEAUTY/TRENT "COOL"
CONFABULATION SPEAKING IN TONGUES HAVERING
FAVOURITE ROOM/PLACE HEAVEN WISHING GAMES
Traditionally, Hypnosis has been understood in terms of the "phenomena" in the first column. My suggestion is that it be conceived in a broader context covering the components of play and religion.
It seems to me that each row constitutes a logical and definable area for research. Already we can see some helpful results. Consider laughter. Of recent years in the hypnotic literature there have been papers remarking on spontaneous outbursts of laughter in hypnotised subjects, causing much puzzlement, mystery and awe among clinicians. Wonder no more! The explanation, I think, is play. The laughter and giggling of child's play hardly requires description. I have already mentioned above, the laughter of the "Toronto Blessing". Consider music. For many years I wondered why music played such a role (there are those words again) in some therapists' techniques. Is it too mundane to say that the answer is already contained in the language we use? We play music. Attribution is well known to the reader in its hypnotic context. Less well known will be the fact that Attribution Theory is one of the main anthropological theories of religion.
Brief Commentary on Table
Laughter - addressed above.
Misattribution - This is considered a major component of the hypnotic experience. Attribution is always to other than self. The hypnotist does not say 'lift your hand up in the air'. He says: "Your hand wants to lift in the air". Similarly a person does not decide to become a priest or minister, he is 'called'. Ministry is a vocation after all. "The Devil made me do it" is another example. Non nobis Domine sed nomine tuo da Gloriam - Not to us Lord the Glory but to Your name. A typical game demonstrating such mis-attribution is Ouija where people seated round a table push an object across the top of the table but experience it as if it was the object itself which was doing the moving. I remember my son Oliver when aged three, was playing with his toy car on the kitchen table. He looked at me then looked at the car. He looked at me again uncertainly and then slowly, deliberately, pushed his toy off the table and burst into tears. He obviously had experienced it as if the toy had fallen of its own accord. Why was it that I felt so dreadful, when I remonstrated with him saying " Why are you crying? It was you who pushed the car off the table"? Because that's how children experience things.
Music - I don't really understand this except to observe that we play music and that music is used by some hypnotherapists to deepen trance. Its use in religion is well known. I have observed Aborigines and Hottentots hitting sticks and producing primitive notes and rhythms in a playful fashion and no doubt over the centuries this sort of thing has evolved into modern music.
Imagination - As Huizinga says, a child in play is making an image of the thing he is playing. This is where the word imagination comes from. The use of images in religion is too well known to require description here. As regards hypnosis, imagination is an acknowledged part of the process. Not only that but we make an image of hypnosis itself. We objectify it , we reify it, we make of it a thing or image and this leads to much confusion. We try to measure this thing when it is not a unitary phenomenon.
Relief of pain and suffering can conveniently be considered along with Framing and Reframing. The whole of childhood can be seen as being spent more or less in play with constant framing and reframing of reality. As children, we often cry or become upset and are reassured and comforted by our parents. Theology can serve a similar purpose. One of the reasons Augustine was so popular was that he was able to make disaster and suffering more bearable by the way he framed and reframed reality, at a time when the Roman Empire was collapsing under invasion from the North. Much of counselling and hypnotherapy consists of doing the same thing.
The Hidden Observer and one's guardian angel seem to me to be an exact fit.
Experimental Theology - I have addressed how this might be conducted in this paper.
Trance Logic or the tolerance of incongruity is well described in the hypnotic literature. It also appears in religion with such phrases as "I believe because it is impossible", "The first shall be last" and "The meek shall inherit the earth". Children often engage their parents in incongruous and ambiguous conversations.
Overreaction - Sometimes when one attempts an induction the subject overreacts to the situation and is clearly not in trance. This could compare with showing off in children. It could also compare with the behaviour of some egregious clergy and some actors.
Posthypnotic Suggestion - I consider this to be the most important row in the tables. If you, the reader, can understand this then you have grasped the main concepts of this paper. What could be the possible connection between the stabbing of Monica Seles, religious murders and Post Hypnotic Suggestion (PHS)? The man who stabbed Monica Seles confused illusion (literally what was in play ), with reality. Many years ago in Australia there was a popular soap opera called Number 96. On one occasion during the plot an apartment at Number 96 became vacant. A number of viewers wrote to Channel 9 asking whether they could have the vacant flat. Here again members of the audience had mistaken illusion (what was in play) with reality. Words which had been written by a scriptwriter had been performed causing confusion between illusion and reality in members of the audience. The same is true in religion when the written word is performed in churches and perceived by the congregation to be real. When we read the words "I the Lord thy God am a jealous God. I will visit the sins of the father unto the third and fourth generation. I will smite the enemy", etc, these words are understood by many in our culture as being uttered by a God. Here we have a major mis-attribution. These words were actually written by a man having a god-like experience and projecting himself in an unsavoury manner which is still prevalent in the Middle East. The religious believer may feel compelled to kill someone based on the instructions in a book or given by a guru. Experiments in the 40's and 50's suggested that the same thing could be accomplished using hypnosis. Subjects could be persuaded to lunge at someone with a knife under experimental conditions. However, once removed from the context where compliance is required, most subjects are not naive enough to persist. The wise hypnotist takes care to remove his illusory 'suggestions' so that the subject does not take them home or out into the street. The religionist does not and that is the difference.
Amnesia Considered by some to be a 'Phenomenon' of hypnosis. I once watched a video demonstration of this given by a guru in Ego State Therapy. Later that same afternoon he proceeded to give a paper on "The Treatment of Amnesia using Hypnosis", without apparently noticing the contradiction. Ever played tennis when no one could remember the score? You couldn't remember because you had never committed the score to memory in the first place and so the score could not be retrieved. Compare this with Isaiah Ch.65 v.17: "For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind."
Positive Hallucination - Corresponds to visions in religion. Is an imaginary friend in childhood the equivalent?
Negative Hallucination - Corresponds possibly, to the Empty Tomb of Christian mythology, a 'narrative truth' for many. I remember one day my son Edward was deep in play and came rushing into the kitchen. I swear he looked clean through me. Does this pass for a negative hallucination?
Role in Role - Not only is hypnosis role playing in the sense that one 'becomes' hypnotised but another layer can be added as described in the text when a subject becomes another person when in hypnosis. The equivalent in children is when the altered state is play and they 'become' their favourite character. In fact Play is Possession. In religion misattribution results when a person who is possessed is perceived by the audience to have become inhabited by another person or spirit.
Compliance - implies that there is pressure on the subject due to the demands of the hypnotic context. The same could be said of attendance at Mass and the recent return of Rugby League players to the ARL.
Belief/Make believe- That hypnosis, religion and play involve belief and make belief needs no further comment here.
Metaphor - Therapeutic metaphors will be well known to the reader. There are more than 180 metaphors for Jesus in the Bible and more than 145 for the Church. Compare this with sporting heroes such as King Wally (Wally Lewis), a famous Australian football hero and the Don (Don Bradman), the famous cricketer.
Becoming - This is another important concept. A subject 'becomes' hypnotised. In Exodus 3:14 we read of "I AM", which in Latin translates into "ego sum". It is our great misfortune that concepts of hypnosis have concentrated on the ego, the I or self, and the Ego State, due to the influence of Freud, rather than the verb 'sum', the 'am' or 'becoming'. This compares with childhood play where children become tigers or monsters or Superman.
Authority - It has been said that there are two kinds of hypnosis, the authoritarian and the permissive versions. Some therapists practice the former while the majority practice the permissive or pastoral variety. This compares with Popes Pius IX and John XXIII in religion and father and mother as regards childhood experience. One could also draw a parallel between recent events in the Australian Rugby League headed by Mr Ken Arthurson who fought with Mr Rupert Murdoch, head of News Ltd, for control of players. This game incidentally is one in which the players endure great pain with apparent equanimity.
Mystery - Everything to the child is mysterious. Hypnosis and religion surround themselves with mystery to encourage this childlike behaviour. Possibly why the Confusional Technique works
Transference - well known to students of hypnosis. Corresponds to childlike feelings of affection and attachment to father and mother, brother and sister, words which are commandeered by the Church.
Legitimacy - an unfortunate but little described aspect of hypnosis and its practice. Various societies of hypnosis seek to establish their legitimacy and to deny the legitimacy of others. The 'denial of legitimacy' is a good working definition of prejudice. Religious organisations also try to establish their legitimacy through the use of various concepts such as Apostolic Succession. In so doing they deny the legitimacy of others though this is often unstated. As regards play the recent ARL debacle in Australia described above, fits the picture.
Depth - Depth of hypnotic involvement could perhaps be compared with depth of belief in religion and depth of involvement of a child in play.
Cuing - A story told by Professor Sheehan illustrates this point. He was once waiting for a subject to arrive for an hypnotic experiment. Just on time, Professor Sheehan heard a knock on the door and went to open the door. When he did so the subject fell at his feet in a deep trance. There had been no induction and it was only the belief and expectation of the subject that produced the trance. In religion the ting of a bell may cue the Real Presence in a well trained congregation. Compare this with the referee's whistle.
Mood and Perception - These two can be considered together. Hypnosis is recognised to alter mood and perception. In religion several moods are established, or sometimes ecstasy and rapture, and these two are tied in with perceptions of beauty in art,sculpture, architecture and music. The Council of Trent specifically established these aspects of religious experience as a priority. Compare these with the mood of delight in children at play and that most common perception in children that things are or are not 'cool'.
Confabulation - in hypnosis can be compared with speaking in tongues and with that good old Scottish word 'havering' in children.
Favourite room or place - the hypnotic technique of establishing a client's favourite room or place to which they can go in their imagination compares or identifies with the religious concept of Heaven and childhood wishing games.
Age/Time Regression - In this technique the hypnotist takes the subject back in time in his imagination. He may meet with and talk to dead relatives for example, as though they were alive, in an attempt to aid the grieving process. This bears comparison with prayer and the living Jesus. Childs play may have a time past component, for example when playing babies.
Age/Time Progression - Much like the above except that the subject is in the future. Compares with Prophesy in religion and Revelation. Much child’s play has a future component as when playing cars or Mums and Dads.
CONCLUSIONS
A The concept of "Stories" as described in the text, include Rebirthing, Repressed Memory Therapy, EMDR, Multiple Personality Disorder and Ego State Therapy. Hypnosis itself, being a member of a theatre audience, and reading a book would also fall into this category.
B Theology can almost certainly be reproduced in a laboratory setting.
C The components of Hypnosis are best understood in conjunction with the components of Play and Religion because they are one and the same.
D The whole Christian story of death and resurrection can be seen as a function of age regression in hypnosis.
E Hypnosis is but one form of Illusion - literally that which is in play
Finally I want to draw your attention to a quote from Huizinga which explicitly links play to religion:
"The ritual act has all the formal and essential characteristics of play ... particularly in so far as it transports the participants to another world. This identity of ritual and play was unreservedly recognised by Plato as a given fact. He had no hesitation in comprising the sacra in the category of play. 'I say that a man must be serious with the serious.... God alone is worthy of supreme seriousness, but man is made God's plaything, and that is the best part of him. Therefore every man and woman should live accordingly and play the noblest games and be of another mind from what they are at present.... What then is the right way of living? Life must be lived as play, playing certain games, making sacrifices, singing and dancing, and then a man will be able to propitiate the Gods and defend himself against his enemies and win the contest.' "
I hope that this paper has convinced you, the reader and the audience, that the same link exists between play and hypnosis and that the three - play, hypnosis and religious experience - are one and the same.
References
Boulton, M.J. & Smith P.K. (1992). The Social Nature of Play Fighting and Play Chasing: Mechanisms and Strategies Underlying Cooperation and Compromise. In The Adapted Mind - Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Cosmides, L. & Tooby J. (1992). Cognitive Adaptations for Social Exchange. In The Adapted Mind - Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Graham, G.(1986). How to Become the Parent you Never Had. Blaydon upon Tyne: Real Options Press.
Graham, G.(1987). It's a Bit of a Mouthful - Into and Out of the Mouths of Babes and Sucklings. Blaydon upon Tyne: Real Options Press.
Graham, G.(1988). The Happy Neurotic - How to Use the Bio-computer Between Your Ears in the Search for Happiness. Blaydon upon Tyne: Real Options Press.
Graham, G.(1990). How to Change Your Life - It's Your Life . Why Not Enjoy It. Blaydon upon Tyne: Real Options Press.
Houston, A.F.(1993). " To Be" or not "To Be": That is the Question. Australian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis . Vol 2 pp65-68.
Huizinga, J. (1949). Homo Ludens : A Study of The Play Element in Culture. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Miller, D.L.(1974). The New Polytheism: Rebirth of the Gods and Goddesses. New York: Harper and Row.
Moltmann, J. et al.(1972). Theology of Play . New York: Harper and Row
Sarbin T.R.(1989). The Construction and Reconstruction of Hypnosis. In Nicholas B. Spanos and John F. Chaves (Editors) Hypnosis - The Cognitive and Behavioural Perspective (pp400-416). New York: Prometheus.