experience at any moment. We will use this
capacity if for any reason an intense stimulus
distracts us from the film, or even if the film is
just not to our liking. When the film finishes, we
often need a few seconds to adapt ourselves
again to the external world.
Although we can experience a film with
intensity, in no case can we get stuck in it to the
point at which we confuse film and reality. An
honest presentation of hypnosis must inform us
that what occurs while we are in hypnosis is
similar to what occurs when we go to the
cinema.
Hypnosis vs. Seduction and Coercion: A
Comparison
To help us better to understand the differences
of hypnosis with regard to psychological
manipulation, it is useful to compare what
occurs while one is under hypnosis with what
occurs while one is in the manipulative contexts
of seduction and coercion. This is the focus of
the following subsections.
Seduction
Seduction can be sexual, nonsexual, or both
simultaneously. We are seduced when someone
has something we do not have but wish to have.
Let us consider amorousness as a means of
seduction. When we are in love, we are seduced
by the other person. This means that we are
dissociated from all that is negative about them.
Although we can perceive things that we do not
like in the other, it is as if we do not actually see
them. This state is what dissociation involves:
seeing without seeing. This dissociated way of
perceiving is truly a hurdle for critical thinking,
so much so that critical thinking will disappear
under such circumstances. That absence of
critical thinking will be a stimulus for the
continuation of dissociated perception. Thus,
dissociation will enhance low critical thinking,
and vice versa, as in the following example of
what might occur when a person is feeling the
initial stages of strong attraction, or
amorousness, toward another person.
Amorousness results in the following:
↑ Dissociation: I see only the good.
Any bad that I see, I do not truly
perceive (We see through the eyes of
the mind)
↓ Critical Thinking: Everything is
good.
Coercion
We understand coercion as a relationship based
upon fear, guilt, or both. Thus, the following two
sentences stated by the leader of a cult group are
oriented to provoke fear and guilt, respectively,
in the recipient:
If you go away, you will be miserable.
After all we have done for you, you
cannot be so selfish as to abandon us.
Because fear and guilt are two powerful
emotions that strongly interfere with freedom of
thought, these sentences are coercive because
they are intended to elicit in the recipient a
certain behavior and way of thinking by means
of fear and guilt respectively. When these
situations are repeated over time, they will
clearly contribute to establishing a manipulative
context that will stimulate the victim’s high
dissociation and decrease in critical thinking.
This combination will provoke a state of
heightened suggestibility that will favor the
aggressor. In that state of high suggestibility, the
recipient loses perspective of the portion of
reality he is being dissociated from he begins to
lose even the very notion of being in a coercive
environment, up to the point at which he feels
himself to be totally free and able to make any
decision required. A person in such a state will
not even see the aggressor as such. That is why
we say that the victim’s heightened state of
suggestibility will favor the aggressor in this
coercive context. Let us examine two examples.
Example 1: Stockholm syndrome. In this
context, a person in a hostage situation
dissociates from the whole situation and
perceives merely a part of it. So at each instance
of care exhibited by her captor, for instance, the
victim may lack the ability of seeing the whole
context, even beginning to feel, as a
consequence, an affective closeness toward that
captor. If the victim saw beyond the immediate
concern, she would perceive the global situation
in which she was being held and deprived of her
56 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 6, 2015
capacity if for any reason an intense stimulus
distracts us from the film, or even if the film is
just not to our liking. When the film finishes, we
often need a few seconds to adapt ourselves
again to the external world.
Although we can experience a film with
intensity, in no case can we get stuck in it to the
point at which we confuse film and reality. An
honest presentation of hypnosis must inform us
that what occurs while we are in hypnosis is
similar to what occurs when we go to the
cinema.
Hypnosis vs. Seduction and Coercion: A
Comparison
To help us better to understand the differences
of hypnosis with regard to psychological
manipulation, it is useful to compare what
occurs while one is under hypnosis with what
occurs while one is in the manipulative contexts
of seduction and coercion. This is the focus of
the following subsections.
Seduction
Seduction can be sexual, nonsexual, or both
simultaneously. We are seduced when someone
has something we do not have but wish to have.
Let us consider amorousness as a means of
seduction. When we are in love, we are seduced
by the other person. This means that we are
dissociated from all that is negative about them.
Although we can perceive things that we do not
like in the other, it is as if we do not actually see
them. This state is what dissociation involves:
seeing without seeing. This dissociated way of
perceiving is truly a hurdle for critical thinking,
so much so that critical thinking will disappear
under such circumstances. That absence of
critical thinking will be a stimulus for the
continuation of dissociated perception. Thus,
dissociation will enhance low critical thinking,
and vice versa, as in the following example of
what might occur when a person is feeling the
initial stages of strong attraction, or
amorousness, toward another person.
Amorousness results in the following:
↑ Dissociation: I see only the good.
Any bad that I see, I do not truly
perceive (We see through the eyes of
the mind)
↓ Critical Thinking: Everything is
good.
Coercion
We understand coercion as a relationship based
upon fear, guilt, or both. Thus, the following two
sentences stated by the leader of a cult group are
oriented to provoke fear and guilt, respectively,
in the recipient:
If you go away, you will be miserable.
After all we have done for you, you
cannot be so selfish as to abandon us.
Because fear and guilt are two powerful
emotions that strongly interfere with freedom of
thought, these sentences are coercive because
they are intended to elicit in the recipient a
certain behavior and way of thinking by means
of fear and guilt respectively. When these
situations are repeated over time, they will
clearly contribute to establishing a manipulative
context that will stimulate the victim’s high
dissociation and decrease in critical thinking.
This combination will provoke a state of
heightened suggestibility that will favor the
aggressor. In that state of high suggestibility, the
recipient loses perspective of the portion of
reality he is being dissociated from he begins to
lose even the very notion of being in a coercive
environment, up to the point at which he feels
himself to be totally free and able to make any
decision required. A person in such a state will
not even see the aggressor as such. That is why
we say that the victim’s heightened state of
suggestibility will favor the aggressor in this
coercive context. Let us examine two examples.
Example 1: Stockholm syndrome. In this
context, a person in a hostage situation
dissociates from the whole situation and
perceives merely a part of it. So at each instance
of care exhibited by her captor, for instance, the
victim may lack the ability of seeing the whole
context, even beginning to feel, as a
consequence, an affective closeness toward that
captor. If the victim saw beyond the immediate
concern, she would perceive the global situation
in which she was being held and deprived of her
56 International Journal of Cultic Studies ■ Vol. 6, 2015
