So you want
to change yourself?
Hypnosis
and Gestalt Therapy
If you are wanting to change
yourself, to reconstruct yourself into a new way of being that is happy and at
peace, the next best thing to hypnosis is psychotherapy. But not any therapy.
From my experience, the most effective therapy is Gestalt therapy.
Gestalt therapy was popular during
the swinging 1960s. However, as it was popularised then, it was quite
confrontational. That was not real Gestalt therapy. That was a distortion to
serve the needs of certain charismatic leaders of the time.
Today Gestalt therapy has gone back
to it's caring core principles and has developed them into unique processes for
personal growth and awakening. Today it is based on respect for each
individual's strategies and leads to a gentle awakening of the True Self.
When we compare Hypnosis with Gestalt
therapy we find that Gestalt therapy utilises many of the major techniques of
Ericksonian hypnosis and achieves similar deep and lasting change; and while
the theoretical frameworks appear different, in the final analysis perhaps it
is not.
1.
What is Positive
Hypnosis
Positive hypnosis is that which was
practiced by Milton Erickson, MD, amongst others and is the method used by
hypnotherapists. It is called “positive hypnosis” to distinguish it from
“negative hypnosis” which is the method used by stage hypnotists. Both forms of
hypnosis are specific states of consciousness created through activating specific known changes to
a person’s brain and nervous system behaviour.
The first requirement of both forms
of hypnosis is to cause the dominant brain hemisphere, usually the left
hemisphere in right-handed people, to shut down. This hemisphere is responsible
for critical analytical thinking. The shut-down is initiated by having the
person narrow their focus of attention until all attention is focused on one
thing, perhaps the hypnotists voice, perhaps the client’s breathing, perhaps an
object they are looking at, perhaps a sentence the hypnotist has said of which
the meaning is ambiguous or confusing causing the person to enter internal
subconscious analysis. As Reyner (1983) describes it:
The hypnotic induction
process works by having the subject concentrate on a single focus point to the
exclusion of everything else… Once this single-minded state has been reached,
the door into the unconscious is unlocked and the hypnotist can swing it open.
He directs the subject’s mind away from whatever he is concentrating on, and
onto himself and his own suggestions: and from that moment he has direct access
to the unconscious. (Page 17).
The second requirement is to
activate the parasympathetic or sympathetic nervous system. In positive
hypnosis the parasympathetic nervous system is activated and this causes
breathing to slow, heart rate to slow, blood pressure to reduce, a sensation of
floating, and various other physiological changes. It is activated by looking
upwards and by focussing attention on the chest area. In negative hypnosis the
sympathetic nervous system is activated and this causes excitation including
perspiration, increased hear rate, increased blood flow, and other symptoms.
This is activated by shock such as when a stage hypnotist brings a ‘victim’
onto the stage, asks them to close their eyes, and creates a loud sound from a
new direction (Shone,1985, page 25).
The third requirement is to activate
the non-dominant hemisphere of the brain such that control is passed from the
dominant hemisphere, which is now shutting down, to the non-dominant
hemisphere. The non-dominant hemisphere, usually the right hemisphere in
right-handed people, is responsible for holistic, visual creativity and
emotions and is characterised by a heightened awareness and child-like
acceptance of all external suggestions without any reality testing. This
transfer of control is achieved by having the person perform tasks which
require non-dominant hemisphere activity, such as visualisation.
When these requirements have been
met the person is in trance and any suggestions made by the hypnotist are
received and implemented uncritically (Shone,1985, pages 32-37).
2.
The
concept of ‘change’ in the two approaches
One of the basic tenets of hypnosis
is that conscious awareness and insight are not necessary for change to occur. Change
occurs through new frames of reference and the unconscious will arrange affairs
so as to bring about the suggested reframing. Traditional authoritarian
hypnosis created resistance to change in clients by dictating the changes that
had to occur. Thus some changes would occur but the client may have remain
conflicted at an inner level. Modern Ericksonian hypnosis adopts a
client-centred approach known as “utilisation” which assumes that the person’s
unconscious has the resources and knowledge to create new frames or reference (models
of reality) drawing on learned (conditioned) behaviour as a resource. The
suggestions may be specific behavioural changes or they may be content-free
process instructions (Bandler and Grinder, 1979) such as “… and your
unconscious mind knows what to do to create the behaviour that you want and it
will reorganise old memories and experiences to draw on your learning to make
the changes”. In summary, hypnosis
places on attention on awareness of the existing problem state and instead focuses
entirely on suggesting to the unconscious that solutions are to be found to
current problems. Awareness of old memories
and learned behaviours may be useful, as an option, when the hypnotist chooses
to make a negative anchor by creating an association between the unwanted
behaviour and an unpleasant sensation or image. This is a common technique for
creating aversion to unwanted habits, such as smoking cigarettes. Awareness of
the desired behaviour is also not necessary unless the hypnotist chooses to
make a positive anchor to reinforce a specific targeted change by creating an
association between the wanted behaviour and some sensation or image which may
act as a cue for the new behaviour.
Awareness is, however, the goal of
Gestalt therapy. In Gestalt therapy growth or change is viewed as the natural
result of awareness of how one is. Specifically, Gestalt theory encompasses
Beisser’s Paradoxical Theory of Change: “.
. . that change occurs when one becomes what he is, not when he tries to become
what he is not.” (Beisser 2001). In practice, this involves the client in processes
of identifying and experiencing existing aspects of self that may be expressed conceptually
as polarities and often arise from unmet needs or unfinished situations of the
past, or from unhelpful models of self or field formed from introjection of
other’s beliefs. The client is then involved in identifying their unique
interruptions to contact that hold those “aspects” (unmet needs, unfinished
situations, introjects) in their unfinished state; and the client has
opportunities to complete those aspects, or choose to change, through experiential
experiment in which the ‘forces for same’ holding the client in their pattern
are fully experienced and deconstructed. Upon integration of the previously unintegrated
aspects the client will naturally move on to identifying and fulfilling the
next most pressing need and thus experience growth and change.
While hypnosis does not conceive of
the “Paradoxical theory of change” as such, the concept of “utilisation” within
Ericksonian hypnosis acknowledges the existence within the person of the
resources for change, even though that change may be safely undertaken by the
unconscious out of awareness. Yet even in this respect, in the role of the
unconscious, Ericksonian hypnosis and Gestalt theory have commonalities. In
hypnosis the change may be handled by the unconscious. In Gestalt primacy is
given to the role of awareness. Yet Gestalt only places primacy on awareness of
current state and contends that change will happen naturally, indeed,
“organismically”, once awareness of how one is achieved. What is this
organismic change if it is not change through the action of the unconscious? The
existing state of the person must be in awareness but the change to the future
state may be out of awareness.
3.
Similarities
and differences between Gestalt therapy and Hypnosis
While Gestalt therapy and hypnosis
have different, and at the same time similar, theoretical models of awareness
and change, they also perform similar processes and have similar effects. There
are many examples in the literature noting this similarity between Gestalt and
hypnosis. Freda Morris, a well-known hypnotherapist reports on a conversation
with Fritz Perls:
…the hypnotic state
cannot always be readily recognized. I once said to the founder of Gestalt
therapy, Fritz Perls, about his therapeutic work, “Of course, it’s all done
with hypnosis.” He answered with a knowing smile, “As a matter of fact, it is.”
Perls was a remarkably effective therapist. He hypnotized his patients and then
used the hypnotic state to find and help them change their neuroses. Many of
his followers are less effective, at least partly because they do not know the
role hypnosis plays. (Morris 1979, page 3).
Levitsky (1977, page 116) says that
“both the spirit and techniques of Gestalt therapy lend themselves readily to
(hypnotic) trance induction, trance deepening and trance management”. This is
supported by Bandler and Grinder (1979):
Most of the techniques in
different types of psychotherapy are nothing more than hypnotic phenomena. When
you look at an empty chair and start talking to your mother, that’s a “deep
trance phenomenon” called “positive auditory and visual hallucination”. It’s
one of the deep trance phenomena that defines somnambulism. (Page 101)
Referring to the three phase
induction process described at the start of this essay, we find that Gestalt
employs that induction process. Bandler and Grinder (1975) have extensively
investigated the work of Milton Erickson. Their work shows that deep hypnotic
induction can be made to occur by focussing the client on their own internal
process while at the same time distracting the client’s thinking mind with
dialogue that has no referential index and thus requires deep cognitive
processing for interpretation. This is often the process that, in effect,
occurs in the early part of the Gestalt therapy dialogue. The therapist engages the client on their own
sensations and presence and at the same time engages in dialogic questioning
that forces the client to go to cognitive depths for meaningful answers. This initiates the dominant hemisphere
shut-down process and stimulates the parasympathetic nervous system.
In Gestalt therapy, with its
holistic approach, the person is encouraged to focus on their experience from
many perspectives - thoughts, physical sensations, images, emotions, posture,
motor phenomena – indeed any sensate and kinaesthetic phenomena within the
person that arise in connection with the problem or in the process of the
dialogue. Many, if not most of these phenomena that are being encouraged are
non-dominant hemisphere phenomena and their activation completes, to varying
degrees, the switch of control from dominant hemisphere to non-dominant
hemisphere.
Gestalt also employs the
“phenomenological approach”[1]
, encouraging the person to stay with the unfolding of these phenomena in the
‘here’ and ‘now’ , in the “moment” thus reducing the possibility of deflection
into analytical dominant hemisphere activity. As noted above, focus on sensate
and kinaesthetic phenomena in immediate experience “is itself already the
beginning of a hypnotic-like experience which the therapist might choose to
broaden, direct and utilize for specific purposes” (Levitsky, page 117). At the
same time, the questioning employed by the therapist necessarily involves
making meaning of the reported experiences without external referential
indices, due to the singularity of the client in their field, thereby
compelling the client into internal reference. This process increases access to
the unconscious even though an identifiable hypnotic trance state may not
occur.
In this new state the client has
heightened awareness and child-like receptivity and suggestibility. The
hypnotic trance consists of the “alpha” brain state in which the brain speed is
eight to 12 cycles per second (Shona, 1985, page 36). It is important to note
that in this state the person may feel relaxed and hypersensitive but they may
not feel or believe that they are in trance. In hypnosis this trance state can
be proved to the client through demonstrations of eye catalepsy, arm levitation
and other involuntary phenomena. In Gestalt therapy the client may remain
unaware consciously that they are in a state of altered consciousness even
though they may exhibit all the phenomena of that state.
In the full expression of this process
a shift may occur in either or both of the therapist and client from “I – It”
to “I – Thou” as opening to the relation (Buber 1937, page 12) yields full confluence,
equivalent to mutual hypnotic induction, which may also function as a powerful hypnotic
suggestion of joining and support in the relation between the two individuals
at deep levels.
Gestalt therapy, having brought
unconscious material in awareness through inquiry and dialogue, utilises a
range of experiments in which the client identifies with and consciously
holistically experiences different aspects of themselves of which they are now
aware. As unwanted polarities are brought into awareness they are subject to
deconstruction through switching between poles of the polarity until an
integration between the various aspects of the client occurs and the emergence
of a new solution containing some characteristics of the old and the new. At
the same time the desired polarity is anchored through repetition and remains
in awareness for future reference. This experiencing of the positive polarities
and the integration performs the function equivalent to suggestion in hypnosis.
A further comparison between Gestalt
therapy and hypnosis regards the role of the therapist. Traditional hypnosis
was very hypnotist-centred. From it’s early days with Mesmer in the 1760s the
“magnetism” of the hypnotist was considered the determining factor. With
subsequent understanding of the method, the forcefulness of the suggestions
became considered to be the determining factor with the hypnotist delivering
suggestions as commands in an authoritarian manner. It is only with the
relatively recent developments by Erickson in the 1930s to 1970’s that
hypnotism became client-centred and the role of the hypnotist became that of
facilitator of the client’s internal processes and abilities. The role of the
Ericksonian hypnotherapist is to facilitate the awarenesses which lead to the
activation of the alpha trance state and to provide guidance to the client’s
unconscious in its direction of healing. In this respect there is great
similarity with the role of the Gestalt therapist.
4.
Conclusions
Hypnosis has a long history of effectiveness
but has only recently been understood in terms of brain and nervous system
function. Many aspects of it are still not understood. The techniques of
induction in positive hypnosis and Ericksonian hypnosis are known to have
specific effects on neurological behaviour so as to induce the alpha, and
deeper theta, levels of brain activity. It achieves this by activating the
parasympathetic nervous systems and switching control from the dominant to the
non-dominant brain hemisphere. The effect is heightened awareness and
suggestibility as well as various physiological changes. The client need not
have much awareness of the problems or solutions as the unconscious mind is
capable of taking care of things as it clearly demonstrated through the
manifestation of involuntary phenomena such as arm levitation at the suggestion
of the hypnotist. The theoretical framework is minimal, although there is much
speculation regarding neuro linguistic processing (Blandler and Grinder (1975),
and includes the concepts of “unconscious” and “utilisation” which simply mean
that the client’s unconscious is presumed to be able to fix the client’s
behaviour when requested to do so.
Gestalt therapy has a markedly
different theoretical framework to hypnosis. It considers that awareness of the
current state is essential and employs holism and phenomenology within the
general paradigm of the Paradoxical Theory of Change to facilitate an hypnotic
like induction in which the client enters the alpha trance state in which they
are able to become aware of their polarities and the ‘force for same’ and ‘force
for change’ and integrate them into new structures. While hypnosis does not conceive of the
“Paradoxical theory of change” as such, the concept of “utilisation” within
Ericksonian hypnosis acknowledges the existence within the person of the
resources for change, even though the person need not be aware of those
resources.
Gestalt and hypnosis share the view
that change can occur out of awareness. Gestalt refers to change as occurring “organismically”
once awareness of current state is achieved. Hypnosis refers to the role of the
unconscious in making change.
In my own subjective experience of
both hypnosis and Gestalt therapy I notice some similarities and some differences.
Hypnosis, for me, seems to involve a slight sensation of separation into
parallel awarenesses in which emotional activity ceases and a neutral, dissociated,
witness hears the hypnotist and performs the suggested responses automatically.
It is a pleasant, detached and deeply relaxing experience. Although sometimes
there are strage releases of cathartic energy, like a release from the depths
of a volcano, that seem quite impersonal. Gestalt, by contrast, is an intensely
emotional (for me) experience and involves direct identification with sensations
that I didn’t know I had, as they emerge into awareness. Are they perhaps planted
there by suggestion?
As I consider the Ericksonian hypnosis
concept of utilisation, I concede that the knowledge of these feelings must
have been within my consciousness at some level or I would not have been able
to draw them out and intensify them. Ultimately the answer is in the outcome.
Hypnosis seems to painlessly create lasting behaviour change. Gestalt therapy seems
to cathartically create lasting behavioural change. But more than that, the most
profound difference for me is that Gestalt therapy has given me a deep sense of
realness, of knowing the territory at a deep and intimate level from travelling
over so much of it, of no longer being afraid to find out who I am at every
level of my being.
For those of you who are wanting to
grow, who are wanting to explore the very depths of your being and bring forth
everything that you are and can be, you can do no better than engage in a year
long program of Gestalt Therapy combined with hypnosis. You would use Gestalt
Therapy to find those buried aspects of yourself and then use hypnosis to
change any that you would like to change.
I wish you all the best with your
journey!
REFERENCES
Bandler, Richard and
Grinder, John (1975). Patterns of the
Hypnotic Techniques of Milton H. Erickson, M.D.
Bandler, Richard and
Grinder, John (1979). Frogs into Princes.
Neuro Linguistic Programming.
Beisser,
Buber, Martin (1937). I and Thou.
Clarkson, P. (1996). Gestalt Counselling in Action.
Kennedy, David (1995) Clinical Hypnosis & Ericksonian
Psychotherapy. Module One. Unpublished material.
Levitsky, Abraham “Combining Hypnosis with Gestalt Therapy”
in Smith, Edward (ed.) (1977) The Growing Edge of Gestalt Therapy.
Morris, Freda (1979). Hypnosis with Friends and Lovers.
Patterson, C. H. (1986). Theories of Counselling and Psychotherapy.
Reyner, Henry (1983). Hypnosis -The Truth. NSW,
Shone, Ronald (1985). Advanced Auto-hypnosis.
Smith, Edward W. L. (ed.) (1976). The Growing Edge of Gestalt Therapy.New
© 2005 Laura Y.
Contact: Laura@wyldhypnotica.com
Laura@surpassingprosperity.com
* * * *
[1] ‘Phenomenology according to Husserl …addresses itself to the subjective process by which phenomena are presented’ – Smith (1976) Page 20.