Hypnosis and evolution

[Upisoft]

Hi all,

I was interested in the phenomenon of hypnosis. I was googling around and I have found that it is globally accepted that the phenomenon exists. Then I thought about what could be the benefit that we have this ability to switch to a state of increased suggestibility. How on Earth we could have evolved this ability?

One answer could be this is a leftover interface that helped our creator to "debug" us. Anyway this will not help Christians and most theists, as they have to give up on free will and omnipotence of the Creator.

So, my question is if there is any naturalistic explanation to this phenomenon?

 

[Upisoft]

Also relevant question to theists. Why God will make us susceptible to hypnosis if He cared about our free will?

 

[Jro]

I'm not 100% on any of this, but there might be mechanisms of the brain that facilitate going along with a group. They did an experiment, back in the 70s I believe, although I'm very likely mistaken, where a subject was placed in a room with three other people and a table with two lines and a set of rulers. They were told to measure the two lines and report back if they were the same or different lengths. The other three folks in the room were actors who all agreed that the lengths were the same, despite them being very different and eventually, most of the experimental subjects agreed that the lines length was the same. Similar experiments reported similar results with authority figures asking folks to torture people, etc.

It may be that when presented with an authoritative enough figure, our brain says 'OH NO, GO ALONG WITH THE GROUP THINK.'

It could also just be that our brains have weird triggers you can hack, the same way the right set of chemicals can make you hallucinate.

 

[Upisoft]

So, the benefit will be the ability to hypnotize yourself in thinking something happened when it actually didn't happened, so you can get along the rest of the group without much discomfort...

I wonder if this can be applied to religions...

 

[Hespera]

Hi all,

I was interested in the phenomenon of hypnosis. I was googling around and I have found that it is globally accepted that the phenomenon exists. Then I thought about what could be the benefit that we have this ability to switch to a state of increased suggestibility. How on Earth we could have evolved this ability?

One answer could be this is a leftover interface that helped our creator to "debug" us. Anyway this will not help Christians and most theists, as they have to give up on free will and omnipotence of the Creator.

So, my question is if there is any naturalistic explanation to this phenomenon?

Is your point to come up with something that cant / has not been explained, to your satisfaction, by "naturalistic means' and that having identified such a thing, you have evidence for god? Doesnt sound like it, but just checking.

What you call an ability may be more of a disability, or a flaw.
Being "suggestible' is not considered an asset to someone!

My take on a lot of aspects of the human mind is that are probably best explained as side effects of a having a highly developed but very poorly understood or trained brain.

 

[Naraoia]

Not knowing much about the subject, I'm leaning towards the "weird triggers" explanation.

Doesn't hypnosis basically switch you into a dreamlike state? All kinds of external stimuli can become integrated into a dream, so the suggestibility isn't too surprising if you look at it that way.

Of course, the evolutionary significance of dreams is a big fat problem in its own right, so this isn't much of an explanation after all

 

[Hespera]

Not knowing much about the subject, I'm leaning towards the "weird triggers" explanation.

Doesn't hypnosis basically switch you into a dreamlike state? All kinds of external stimuli can become integrated into a dream, so the suggestibility isn't too surprising if you look at it that way.

Of course, the evolutionary significance of dreams is a big fat problem in its own right, so this isn't much of an explanation after all

It is funny watching a dog dream.

 

[Naraoia]

It is funny watching a dog dram.

I've never had the pleasure

 

[Jro]

I've never had the pleasure

You haven't lived.

 

[Upisoft]

Is your point to come up with something that cant / has not been explained, to your satisfaction, by "naturalistic means' and that having identified such a thing, you have evidence for god? Doesnt sound like it, but just checking.

I have nothing like "evidence of god" in mind. An omnipotent god would not need such thing to check upon us / plant false memories. If we were designed, and existence of hypnosis is not enough to be a evidence of that ever happened, the our designer was very much like us - fallible and material creature.

What you call an ability may be more of a disability, or a flaw.
Being "suggestible' is not considered an asset to someone!

That's bothering me. According to studies: (Quote is from skepdic.com)

There are 12 standard tests in the SHSS (Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale) which measure how well a subject conforms to the behavior of a classically hypnotized person. By these scales, about 5% of people are classically unhypnotizable, most people show moderate scores, and about 10% are hypnotizable to extreme depths and show the classical deep trance phenomena such as somnambulism, visual and auditory hallucinations, and ability to remain deeply in hypnosis with eyes open.

In other words there is more people with a particular "disability" in the population and we expect the opposite.

 

[Upisoft]

Not knowing much about the subject, I'm leaning towards the "weird triggers" explanation.

Doesn't hypnosis basically switch you into a dreamlike state? All kinds of external stimuli can become integrated into a dream, so the suggestibility isn't too surprising if you look at it that way.

Of course, the evolutionary significance of dreams is a big fat problem in its own right, so this isn't much of an explanation after all

Look here for the difference between the popular idea of hypnosis and real thing:

hypnosis - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com

 

[Hespera]

I have nothing like "evidence of god" in mind. An omnipotent god would not need such thing to check upon us / plant false memories. If we were designed, and existence of hypnosis is not enough to be a evidence of that ever happened, the our designer was very much like us - fallible and material creature.


That's bothering me. According to studies: (Quote is from skepdic.com)
In other words there is more people with a particular "disability" in the population and we expect the opposite.

Perhaps disability isnt the right word.

Ability probably isnt either.

 

[jayem]

Hi all,

I was interested in the phenomenon of hypnosis. I was googling around and I have found that it is globally accepted that the phenomenon exists. Then I thought about what could be the benefit that we have this ability to switch to a state of increased suggestibility. How on Earth we could have evolved this ability?

One answer could be this is a leftover interface that helped our creator to "debug" us. Anyway this will not help Christians and most theists, as they have to give up on free will and omnipotence of the Creator.

So, my question is if there is any naturalistic explanation to this phenomenon?

Consciousness is complex and is not a simple binary awake/sleep phenomenon. It's a continuum, with various gradations between fully awake and fully asleep. The hypnotic state is most likely one point on the curve. And it's a natural part of the physiology of consciousness, and it exists in everyone. (Though can be induced more easily in some people.) What I'm saying is that the hypnotic state didn't evolve separately through natural selection--it's just part of the same process that produces wakefullness and attention.

A lot of anatomic and physiologic characteristics don't have a specific "purpose." They exist simply because they are part and parcel of other necessary functions. An example would be melanocytic nevi, or the common benign skin moles. The cells that produce pigment are usually dispersed more or less evenly throughout the skin during fetal development. But some of these pigment cells will clump together in various locations. This results in the common moles which virtually all people have. They don't serve any specific purpose--they occur just as part of the process by which our skin is pigmented. And they're not subject to natural selection, since they don't affect reproductive fitness.

 

[Jro]

But some of these pigment cells will clump together in various locations. This results in the common moles which virtually all people have. They don't serve any specific purpose--they occur just as part of the process by which our skin is pigmented. And they're not subject to natural selection, since they don't affect reproductive fitness.

They're not really heritable at all are they?

 

[Naraoia]

Look here for the difference between the popular idea of hypnosis and real thing:

hypnosis - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com

That was an entertaining read, but most of it is about how hypnotherapy is of questionable value and susceptible to quackery. Which I already knew

Thanks to the skepdic article, though, I found this, which has a lot more about what's actually happening (or not) in hypnosis. Geez, this field is a lot more complicated than I thought.

I found the outcome of this study particularly interesting. The effect of hypnosis doesn't seem to be wholly due to the label, but still, what you call it makes a heck of a difference! (Although... seriously, group testing and self-reporting in an experiment like that? Hello, confounding variables!)

 

[Upisoft]

Consciousness is complex and is not a simple binary awake/sleep phenomenon. It's a continuum, with various gradations between fully awake and fully asleep. The hypnotic state is most likely one point on the curve. And it's a natural part of the physiology of consciousness, and it exists in everyone. (Though can be induced more easily in some people.) What I'm saying is that the hypnotic state didn't evolve separately through natural selection--it's just part of the same process that produces wakefullness and attention.

The information on the net shows that hypnosis is not sleep like state, as the media image represents it. It is more like state of increased attention and increased suggestibility. Also, it is not true that all of people can be hypnotized. According the quote from my last post, 5% of the tested subjects could not be hypnotized.

A lot of anatomic and physiologic characteristics don't have a specific "purpose."

Yes, most of them do have recognized purpose. For example the skull purpose is to protect the brain from damage.

They exist simply because they are part and parcel of other necessary functions. An example would be melanocytic nevi, or the common benign skin moles. The cells that produce pigment are usually dispersed more or less evenly throughout the skin during fetal development. But some of these pigment cells will clump together in various locations. This results in the common moles which virtually all people have. They don't serve any specific purpose--they occur just as part of the process by which our skin is pigmented. And they're not subject to natural selection, since they don't affect reproductive fitness.

A fast glimpse on the wiki page show correlation between number of skin moles and the length of telomeres. So, there could be a reason behind them, which we don't know yet.

 

[Upisoft]

That was an entertaining read, but most of it is about how hypnotherapy is of questionable value and susceptible to quackery. Which I already knew

Thanks to the skepdic article, though, I found this, which has a lot more about what's actually happening (or not) in hypnosis. Geez, this field is a lot more complicated than I thought.

I found the outcome of this study particularly interesting. The effect of hypnosis doesn't seem to be wholly due to the label, but still, what you call it makes a heck of a difference! (Although... seriously, group testing and self-reporting in an experiment like that? Hello, confounding variables!)

Interesting study which may show that hypnosis is self induced for the major part, so if the subject is not cooperating fully the effect is not that good. I wonder if there is chemicals induced hypnosis, I'm off to google about this a bit...

 

[Ar Cosc]

I've never had the pleasure

No need to thank me:

YouTube - Running Dog

 

[Naraoia]

Yes, most of them do have recognized purpose. For example the skull purpose is to protect the brain from damage.

The skull was maintained by natural selection because it protected brains from damage. Strictly speaking, it doesn't have a "purpose", only a "fitness advantage"

A fast glimpse on the wiki page show correlation between number of skin moles and the length of telomeres. So, there could be a reason behind them, which we don't know yet.

Inttteresting. IMO, the most likely explanation isn't that moles themselves have an advantage, but that they are a largely neutral byproduct of something that does (which may be telomere length itself or something that influences telomere length...)

No need to thank me:

Ouch. That's not a fun way to wake up!

 

[Upisoft]

The skull was maintained by natural selection because it protected brains from damage. Strictly speaking, it doesn't have a "purpose", only a "fitness advantage"

I tend to disagree. I think if there is an intellect that recognizes the function of something, "to protect the brain from damage" in this case, then that intellect is justified to call that function "purpose".

Inttteresting. IMO, the most likely explanation isn't that moles themselves have an advantage, but that they are a largely neutral byproduct of something that does (which may be telomere length itself or something that influences telomere length...)

Or that the creator has put an external telomere indicator for observation purpose...