Talk:Covert hypnosis

Editor comments

Hi today i am starting the article on covert hypnosis 23/august/2006 i will be as scientific as possible with lots of references and quotations

I know many will immediately disagree with any ideas portrayed about <anofollow" class="external free">http://streethypnotism.com">covert hypnosis</a>; because its even more eccentric than the concepts in formal hypnosis; but i hope we can overcome this by me talking about covert-hypnosis as a phenoma that some people believe in......and therefore it deserves credit.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Error265 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Verifiability is being worked on! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Error265 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC) {{cleanup taskforce notice|Covert_Hypnosis}} {{cleanup taskforce notice|Covert Hypnosis}} I dont know how to use references properly; i have some verifiable sources (i still need more) but cant reference them right.. please may you help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Error265 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Origin section

I deleted this section as original research. It cited references, but it should have been a distillation of material already published, not an essay.TheRingess 07:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

---

I'm so pleased with the article - thanks to anyone who made it fit, i would have spent more time but have been busy, but its a fine article now (IMO) i might write one quoting alot of erickson on indirect hypnosis soon.. coz i'm pleased that its now a resource for people.. the amount of people who have never heard of covert hypnosis is unbelievable so i like it when people learn new things...

Cheers all Error265

merge with milton model.

• Merge: This describes and application of the milton model. It could be merged there. --Comaze 12:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

You have a point of course and I'm not sure whether I disagree or agree yet. This area is continually evolving and needs room to breathe as well along with changes in language. I believe as long as the roots with the Milton Model are made abundantly clear, having a seperate page encourages (and reports on) more innovation. Otherwise, if everything is on the Milton Model page, there will likely be debates about whether something follows the Milton Model or not. Milton Erickson would not want such constraints. On another note, even though it's not inaccurate I don't really like the term 'covert hypnosis'. There is a slight negative cannotation to that. I think the term 'conversational hypnosis' is a bigger umbrella and doesn't encourage a negative reputation. Siraj555 21:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC) pogi

Second Person in 'Signs you're not...'

Half of the 'Signs you're not using an analytical mind' is written in the second person. Why not write it in third person like the rest of the article? Mfcrox Aug 4 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfcrox (talk • contribs) 21:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Conversational Hypnosis

'covert' hypnosis (as it is addressed in this article) should be considered conversational hypnosis. Since covert hypnosis can be conversational hypnosis, but not all covert hypnosis is conversational hypnosis.

Chwrgy (talk) 03:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)chwrgy

Factual Issues

I am editing a number comments on this page implying that convert hypnosis is a real phenomenon. NLP is controversial at best, at worst it is pure pseudoscience. There is no good scientific evidence for covert hypnosis.

The claim that Darren Brown uses covert hypnosis is unverifiable and probably inaccurate. Brown has never claimed to have used NLP in any of his performances. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinCB (talk • contribs) 04:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

The Darren Brown references are bad. They should be deleted.KevinCB (talk) 05:37, 8 April 2012 (UTC)KevinCB

Here is a quote from Darrren Brown's own website:

"I have never claimed to use NLP to achieve my ‘tricks’. On the contrary, I have written very critically about it in Tricks of the Mind. I reserve the same scepticism for subliminal messaging, as well as a lot of body-language reading and the like."

This article needs to be changed.KevinCB (talk) 09:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)KevinCB

I concur. NLP is notable enough that this article shouldn't be deleted, but it needs to be rewritten from a neutral point of view. This is why I added the POV template. It reads as though Covert hypnosis is widely accepted as factual. It needs to be clear that this is a theory within NLP that is disputed by the consensus of mainstream science. Andrewaskew (talk) 06:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

While I agree that the articke should be retained, I disagree with the attempts to conflate covert hypnosis with NLP. While it is a somewhat loose term, covert hypnosis encompasses well documented elements of Ericksonian hypnosis, some (but far from all) parts of NLP, and even well documented aspects of behaviorism and cognative psychology. Technically, any hypnotic induction which does not use such terms as "hypnotize", "sleep", and the like or any overt disclosure that it is hypnotic in nature is (by definition) covert hypnosis. The effective use of such covert hypnosis requires somewhat different use of language and suggestion than overt hypnosis. That distinction is "widely accepted as factual". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drbillg (talk • contribs) 21:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Igor Ledochowski reference

"Notable covert hypnotists such as Igor Ledochowski has taken the "Ericksonian Hypnosis" technique and developed it even further."

I came to this page hoping to find out about Igor Ledochowski, who touts himself (and is touted by his associates) as a leading covert hypnosis who has invested over $100,000 to learn how to do it. I received an email from Tom O'Connor, a marketing guy, who purports to share info about NLP offering free access to Igor's materials. The materials (here: http://www.coverthypnosisrevealed.com/Free-Gift/) are actually marketing hype to get people to buy from Igor. If you download the transcript (the third item) you can see this for yourself.

In any event, the quote above seems to me to be completely unsubstantiated by any reputable reference. How do we know Igor is "notable"? Who are some others - why just list him? Why does his name/link and the link after his name go to an outside page instead of a Wikipedia article - a webpage that is a marketing page and clearly neither neutral nor reliable? What proof is there of Igor's work with Milton's process? Sadly, my questions that brought me here remain unanswered.

I suggest that this sentence be struck. ReveurGAM (talk) 19:40, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

I've studied Conversational Hypnosis at the Hypnosis Training Acadamy as a new comer the first principles you are taught are how the Brain and Mind Fuction then

once you Understand the Principles Hypnosis is easy to Master you are Taught Self Hypnosis first of all once you go into Trance yourself you start to build up the Language Patterns in Trance Conversational Hypnosis is as real as when you take your next breath only when you become aware that you are breathing because if you weren't aware of your breathing then this means it was outside of conscious awareness which means you were in a different state of consciousness and altered state you are going in and out of different states all the time but because they feel natural it's only when you pay attention that you realise what is happening changing states is Powerful also you are vigorously trained to enter many states at will from negative to positive before you pass any training certification we know the mainstream Media and the like don't believe but they are using the same processes in their communications double standards this would seem 81.20.191.61 (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge/consolidation of topics needed regarding "Sleight of Mouth"

I've added a note to Talk:Methods of neuro-linguistic programming#Request about the overlap and possible conflicts between the Methods of neuro-linguistic programming#Sleight of Mouth article section and this article. --Marc Kupper|talk 01:14, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Edit Request, 12/12/18

Currently, the article is in the preferred state of a PROFRINGE editor who has been trying to force their view against consensus in a slow-motion edit war,

I request that the article be reverted back to its most recent stable version, until such time as said editor is able to achieve consensus on the talk page. 74.70.146.1 (talk) 16:50, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done as this page is protected for content conflicts, please establish a consensus for the change here first. Please note, most pages are protected at The Wrong Version. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Exposing covert hypnotic abuse

What do the professionals offer as to how to go about exposing covert hypnotic abuse?Katesisco (talk) 19:52, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that there is strong evidence for the effectiveness of covert hypnosis. On the other hand, hypnosis is no longer part of standard psychology practice and considered both pseudoscientific and potentially harmful (i.e. see false memory syndrome). —PaleoNeonate – 20:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Regarding The Phrase " sleight if mouth "

I feel this term is very similar to " hellspeak " & " dawn's dropping ( of and relating to "eve's dropping" ).. and these religious and superstitious activities are directly linked with this article

B.carter [email protected] Abezdoe (talk) 22:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)