Chi Mater/Hypnotist comparison

A comparison between hypnotist Scott McFall and chi master,Gin Soo Chu.

Watch the hypnosis clip at 2.30 and see how McFall seems to be doing exactly the same thing that chi masters do.For hypnosis to work the subject has got to have a desire to carry out the act,he is in control.Likewise the student in the chi master clip has a conscious/unconscious desire to please his master in the same way as a dog will wag its tail in the hope of getting a bone.


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk66aJCtCmM&context=C3e36692ADOEgsToPDskKiQXGRPQ6pRdfVmQbz1WsT"]ComedyHypnotistScottMcFallCollege - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKtK-ifyasc"]Gin Soon Chu, Dynamic Push Hand http://www.gstaichi.org - YouTube[/ame]

 

Gin Soon Chu is demonstrating what we call mysterious arts. Their skills have absolutely nothing to do with martial arts, push hands, nor anything connected with internal martial practices.

I've seen a video of a person with Gin Soon Chu's skills get pummeled and beaten by a Karate fighter. It's somewhere in youtube if you want to see it. Sorry I don't know the link.

Their skills only work among themselves or their students. If they call a skeptic member of the audience to the stage and apply their skills with that person, I'll bet it will not work.

 

Overall a very correct comparison, however this part is wrong. The title 'hypnosis' is put to a very broad number of phenomena; some working off the subject's desire to carry out the act, some working off their expectation that they will do it, some working off peer-pressure and so on. Generally speaking calling someone a 'hypnotist' just says that they are going to tell you before they try to manipulate you...

On the other hand academically hypnosis tends to be defined by the existence of a trance state, in which the person is capable of attending to outside stimuli and in many cases responding to it, however their brainwaves have slowed to a frequency more commonly associated with various stages of sleep. This state isn't usually the case with stage hypnotists, and so they wouldn't be included in this technical definition.

/random psychology titbit

In the case of the 'Dynamic Push Hand' video, two of the factors usually used in stage hypnosis are present.

1. The subject expects it to work, in this case from prior experience watching other students, and from the authority of and their trust in the instructor.
   
2. There is a need to conform to the rest of the group, and how they expect them to act.

And there is also a third factor which isn't always the case in stage hypnosis:

They want it to work. Their ego is on the line, since they have invested time in this instructor it would invalidate their time commitment if he couldn't throw them around.


As JRRodriguezIV points out, not all these factors wouldn't be the case with a random bystander. They might be unconvinced by seeing it done to others (as we are from our own personal experiences), and they have no trust in the instructor. They also have no ego need for the instructor to succeed, on the contrary they'd feel good if it didn't work; they would be able to show that they were smarter than the others. They still have the peer pressure element, and so it matters whether they feel themselves part of the group who has been thrown around before. If they don't care what people in that group thinks, then that factor is also removed. Hence, it fails. And hence it really doesn't work in a real fight!

 

Arguable - there are academic arguments for the no-state theory of hypnosis as well. The lines are blurring between the two.

 

Sometimes I like to use self induced hypnosis, or as I like to call it, "hitting the bottle."

 

You could add a religious blessing/healing vid where they all fall about the place as the head honcho taps them on the forehead too lol.
If they want what is on offer they will play out what they deem neccesary to get it.
Whether it be reacting to chi from the master or chi from the pastor

 

Oh certainly, in fact I favour the no-state theory myself. However in that case there is a vast array of techniques usable, and so it is difficult to define hypnosis as a distinct phenomenon. I was just saying that if you did want to give it a specific and technical definition, that's a distinction that can be made.

It is likely true that most if not all effects able to be produced in a trance state could theoretically be reproduced outside of it.

 

I've always thought that stateless hypnosis would be better referred to simply as manipulation.

Then again, stateful hypnosis is basically the same thing - you're just encouraging the person into a more relaxed frame of mind first, making them more suggestible. You could achieve the same thing with the right combination of drugs.

Yep. I'd've thought so.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLw8SVpoN5U"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLw8SVpoN5U[/ame]

 

Of course the subject has to agree... that's why it's called "participation".

 

It's also why those type of "chi demos" are absolute nonsense and cannot be replicated -the "phenomena" does not exist outside of a willing participant

 

Ch'i demonstrations make perfect sense to anyone willing to enjoy the show. We get what we're looking for in life I suppose.

 

..........mind.

 

The word "show" is telling and true - that is all it is; and not terribly convincing either

 

Wait, are you conceding that chi demonstrations are on the same level as magic tricks and stage hypnotism? Do we finally agree?

 

No. Unless you experience it you have no idea.

I'm definately not gonna go there with you though. You're like arguing with a lawyer. There's no winning or losing, it's just cleaning up the mess.....

 

Totally in agreement here.

 

Trust me, there is - and you ain't winning

 

Mr. Hannibal (for lack of a last name.), if you have never tried something, how can you be so sure? Just because something looks a certain way to you doesn't mean that's the whole picture. Why not find a fella that plays push hands and can do this, build a bit of a repoire and then ask to do push hands? You'll see. It's a game, but it does work.

 

Dr. lecter will suffice thank you...

Push hands an chi demos are not the same thing at all. Not even close

One is a genuinely useful aid to balance and energy feel and the other is BS parlour tricks put on to fool the gullible and con students into believing in something that just isn't there.

And I have pushed hands with several Tai Chi/Taiji guys over the years - no chi, no "energy" just good flow and feel. And from years of Ju Jitsu and other arts guess what? I can hold my own