2,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Books on Demand
- Kategorie: Religion und Spiritualität
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
There is inquiry concerning Telepathy or Thought-Transference-is it a fact or is it a delusion? Has Hypnotism any actual standing either in science or common sense? What of Clairvoyance, Planchette, Trance and Trance utterances, Crystal-Gazing and Apparitions? In the following papers intelligent readers, both in and out of the medical profession, will find these subjects fairly stated and discussed, and to some of the questions asked, fair and reasonable answers given. It is with the hope of aiding somewhat in the efforts now being made to rescue from an uncertain and unreasoning supernaturalism some of the most valuable facts in nature, and some of the most interesting and beautiful psychical phenomena in human experience, that this book is offered to the public.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Seitenzahl: 314
Ähnliche
Telepathy
TelepathyPREFACE.CHAPTER I.CHAPTER IICHAPTER III.CHAPTER IV.CHAPTER V.CHAPTER VI.CHAPTER VII.CHAPTER VIII.CHAPTER IX.CHAPTER X.CHAPTER XI.CHAPTER XII.CopyrightTelepathy
R. Osgood Mason
PREFACE.
CHAPTER I.
PSYCHICAL RESEARCH—TELEPATHY OR THOUGHT-TRANSFERENCE.
The status of the old-fashioned ghost story has, within the past ten years, perceptibly changed. Formerly, by the credulous generality of people, it was almost universally accepted without reason and without critical examination. It was looked upon as supernatural, and supernatural things were neither to be doubted nor reasoned about, and there the matter ended.
On the other hand, the more learned and scientific, equally without reason or critical examination, utterly repudiated and scorned all alleged facts and occurrences relating to the subject. “We know what the laws of nature are,” they said, “and alleged occurrences which go beyond or contravene these laws are upon their face illusions and frauds.” And so, with them also, there the matter ended.
In the meantime, while the irreclaimably superstitious and credulous on the one hand, and the unco-scientific and conservative on the other, equally without knowledge and equally without reason, have gone on believing and disbelieving, a large number of people—intelligent, inquiring, quick-witted, and reasonable, some scientific and some unscientific—have come to think seriously regarding unusual occurrences and phenomena, either witnessed or experienced by themselves or related by others, and whose reality they could not doubt, although their relations to ordinary conditions of life were mysterious and occult.
In the investigation of these subjects some new and unfamiliar terms have come into more or less common use. We hear of mind-reading, telepathy, hypnotism, clairvoyance, and psychical research, some of which terms still stand for something mysterious, uncanny, perhaps even supernatural, but they have at least excited interest and inquiry. The subjects which they represent have even permeated general literature; the novelist has made use of this widespread interest in occult subjects and has introduced many of the strange and weird features which they present into his department of literature. Some have made use of this new material without knowledge or taste, merely to excite wonder and attract the vulgar, while others use it philosophically, with knowledge and discrimination, for the purpose of educating their readers in a new and important department of knowledge and thought.
Amongst the more scientific, societies have been formed, reports have been read and published, so that in scientific and literary circles as well as among the unlearned the subject has become one of interest.
The object of these papers will be briefly to tell in connection with my own observations, what is known and what is thought by others who have studied the subject carefully, and especially what has been done by the English Society for Psychical Research and kindred societies.
When an expedition is sent out for the purpose of exploring new and unknown regions, it is often necessary to send forward scouts to obtain some general ideas concerning the nature of the country, its conformation, water-courses, inhabitants, and food supplies. The scouts return and report what they have discovered; their reports are listened to with interest, and upon these reports often depend the movements and success of the whole expedition. It will easily be seen how important it is that the scouts should be intelligent, sharp-witted, courageous and truthful; and it will also be evident that the report of these scouts concerning the new and unknown country is much more valuable than the preconceived opinions of geographers and philosophers, no matter how eminent they may be, who have simply stayed at home, enjoyed their easy-chair, and declared off-hand that the new country was useless and uninhabitable.
The outlying fields of psychology, which are now the subject of psychical research, are comparatively a new and unexplored region, and until within a few years it has been considered a barren and unproductive one, into which it was silly, disreputable, and even dangerous to enter; the region was infested with dream-mongers, spiritualists, clairvoyants, mesmerists, and cranks, and the more vigorously it was shunned the safer would he be who had a reputation of any kind to lose.
Such substantially was the condition of public sentiment, and especially of sentiment in strictly scientific circles, fourteen years ago, when the English Society for Psychical Research came into being. The first movement in the direction of systematic study and exploration in this new field was a preliminary meeting called by Prof. W. F. Barrett, Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, and a few other gentlemen on Jan. 6, 1882, when the formation of such a society was proposed; and in the following month the society was definitely organized and officers were chosen. The first general meeting for business and listening to reports took place July 17th of the same year.
The persons associated in this society were of the most staid and respectable character, noted for solid sense, and a sufficient number of them for practical work were also trained in scientific methods, and were already eminent in special departments of science.
Prof. Henry Sidgwick, Trinity College, Cambridge, was President; Prof. W. F. Barrett, F. R. S. E., Royal College of Science, Dublin, and Prof. Balfour Stewart, F. R. S., Owens College, Manchester, were Vice-Presidents, and among the members were a large number of well-known names of Fellows of various learned and royal societies, professional men, and members of Parliament, altogether giving character to the society, as well as assuring sensible methods in its work. Among the subjects first taken up for examination and, so far as possible, for experimental study, were the following:—
(1) Thought-transference, or an examination into the nature and extent of any influence which may be exerted by one mind upon another, apart from any generally recognized mode of perception or communication.
(2) The study of hypnotism and the forms of so-called mesmeric trance.
(3) An investigation of well-authenticated reports regarding apparitions and disturbances in houses reputed to be haunted.
(4) An inquiry into various psychical phenomena commonly called Spiritualistic.
The first report made to the society was concerning thought-reading, or thought-transference, and was a description of various experiments undertaken with a view to determine the question whether one person or one mind can receive impressions or intelligence from another person or mind without communication by word, touch, or sign, or by any means whatsoever apart from the ordinary and recognized methods of perception, or the ordinary channels of communication.
What is meant by thought-transference is perhaps most simply illustrated by the common amusement known as the “willing game”; it is played as follows:—
The person to be influenced or “willed” is sent out of the room; those remaining then agree upon some act which that person is to be willed to accomplish; as, for instance, to take some particular piece of bric-à-brac from a table or cabinet and place it upon the piano, or to find some article which has been purposely hidden. The person to be willed is then brought back into the room; the leader of the game places one hand lightly upon her shoulder or arm, and the whole company think intently upon the act agreed upon in her absence. If the game is successful, the person so willed goes, with more or less promptness, takes the piece of bric-à-brac thought of, and places it upon the piano, as before agreed upon by the company, or she goes with more or less directness and discovers the hidden article. Nervous agitation, excitement, even faintness or actual syncope, are not unusual accompaniments of the effort on the part of the person so willed, circumstances which at least show the unusual character of the performance and also the necessity for caution in conducting it.
If the game is played honestly, as it generally is, the person to be willed, when she returns to the room, is absolutely ignorant of what act she is expected to perform, and the person with whom she is placed in contact does not intentionally give her any clue or information during the progress of the game.
In the more formal experiments the person who is willed is known as the sensitive, subject, or percipient; the person who conducts the experiment is known as the agent or operator. The sensitive is presumed to receive, in some unusual manner, from the minds of the agent and the company, an impression regarding the action to be performed, without communication between them in any ordinary manner.
This is one of the simplest forms of thought-transference; it is, of course, liable to many errors, and is useless as a scientific test.
Bishop, Cumberland, and other mind readers who have exhibited their remarkable powers all over the world, were doubtless sensitives who possessed this power of perception or receiving impressions in a high degree, so that minute objects, such as an ordinary watch-key, hidden in a barrel of rubbish in a cellar and in a distant part of an unfamiliar city, is quickly found, the sensitive being connected with the agent by the slightest contact, or perhaps only by a string or wire.
The question at issue in all these cases is the same, namely, do the sensitives receive their impressions regarding what they have to do from the mind of the agent by some process other than the ordinary means of communication, such as seeing, hearing, or touch; or do they, by the exceeding delicacy of their perception, receive impressions from slight indications unintentionally and unconsciously conveyed to them by the agent through the slight contact which is kept up between them?
The opinion of a majority of scientific persons has been altogether averse to the theory of thought-transference from one mind to another without the aid of the senses and the ordinary means of communication; and they have maintained that intimations of the thing to be done by the sensitive were conveyed by slight muscular movements unconsciously made by the agent and perhaps unconsciously received by the sensitive. To explain, or rather to formulate these cases, Dr. William B. Carpenter, the eminent English physiologist, proposed the theory of “unconscious muscular action” on the part of the agent and “unconscious cerebration” on the part of the sensitive; and his treatment of the whole subject in his “Mental Physiology,” which was published twenty years ago, and also in his book on “Mesmerism and Spiritualism,” was thought by many to be conclusive against the theory of mind-reading or thought-transference. Especially was this view entertained by the more conservative portion of the various scientific bodies interested in the subject, and also by that large class of people, scientific and otherwise, who save themselves much trouble by taking their opinions ready made.
It was a very easy way of disposing of the matter, so thoroughly scientific, and it did not involve the necessity of studying any new force or getting into trouble with any new laws of mental action; it was simply delightful, and the physiologists rubbed their hands gleefully over the apparent discomfiture of the shallow cranks who imagined they had discovered something new. There was only one troublesome circumstance about the whole affair. It was this: that cases were every now and then making their appearance which absolutely refused to be explained by the new theory of Dr. Carpenter, and the only way of disposing of these troublesome cases was to declare that the people who observed them did not know how to observe, and did not see what they thought they saw.
This was the state of the question, and this the way in which it was generally regarded, when it was taken up for investigation by the Society for Psychical Research.
Experiments on the subject of thought-transference fall naturally into four classes:
(1) Those where some prearranged action is accomplished, personal contact being maintained between the operator and the sensitive.
(2) Similar performances where there is no contact whatever.
(3) Where a name, number, object, or card is guessed or perceived and expressed by speech or writing without any perceptible means of obtaining intelligence by the senses or through any of the ordinary channels of communication.
(4) Where the same ideas have occurred or the same impressions have been conveyed at the same moment to the minds of two or more persons widely separated from each other.
The first and second of these classes are simply examples of the “willing game” carried on under more strict conditions, but they are not counted as of special value on account of the possibility of information being conveyed when contact is permitted, and by means of slight signals, mere movements of the eye, finger, or lip, which might quickly be seized upon and interpreted by the sensitive, even when there was no actual contact. The third and fourth class, however, seem to exclude these and all other ordinary or recognizable means of communication.
The following are examples of the third class, namely, where some object, number, name, or card has been guessed or perceived without the aid of the senses, and without any of the ordinary means of communication between the operator and the subject.
The first experiments here reported were made in the family of a clergyman, by himself, together with his five daughters, ranging from ten to seventeen years of age, all thoroughly healthy persons, and without any peculiar nervous development. The daughters and sometimes, also, a young maid-servant, were the sensitives, and the clergyman, when alone with his family, acted as agent. The test experiments made in this family were conducted by two competent and well-qualified observers, members of the society, and no member of the family was permitted to know the word, name, or object selected, except that the child chosen to act as sensitive was told to what class the object belonged; for instance, whether it was a number, card, or name of some person or place.
The child was then sent out of the room and kept under observation while the test object was agreed upon, and was then recalled by one of the experimenters; and while giving her answers she “stood near the door with downcast eyes,” and often with her back to the company. The experiments were conducted in perfect silence excepting the child’s answer and the “right” or “wrong” of the agent.
It has been charged that these children, later, were caught signalling during the experiments. This is true by their own confession, but it is also true that there was no signalling during the earlier experiments, also that the signalling when used did not improve the results, and furthermore that after they began signalling the effort to keep the mind consciously active and acute during their trials injured the passive condition necessary for success, and eventually destroyed their sensitiveness and thought-reading power altogether.
Besides, most of the tests were made when only the one child was in the room, and, as will be noticed, many of the tests were of such a nature that signalling would be out of the question, especially with their little experience and clumsy code.
The following results were obtained, the name of the object agreed upon being given in italics:—
A white-handled penknife.Was named and color given on the first trial.A box of almonds.Named correctly.A three-penny piece.Failed.A box of chocolate.A button box.A penknife, hidden.Failed to state where it was.
Trial with cards, to be named:—
Two of clubs.Right.Seven of diamonds.Right.Four of spades.Failed.Four of hearts.Right.King of hearts.Right.Two of diamonds.Right.Ace of hearts.Right.Nine of spades.Right.Five of diamonds.Four of diamonds (wrong); then four of hearts, (wrong); then five of diamonds, which was right on the third trial.Two of spades.Right.Eight of diamonds.Wrong.Ace of diamonds.Wrong.Three of hearts.Right.Four of clubs.Wrong.Ace of spades.Wrong.
The following results were obtained with fictitious names:—
William Stubbs.Right.Eliza Holmes.Eliza H.Isaac Harding.Right.Sophia Shaw.Right.Hester Willis.Cassandra—then Hester Wilson.John Jones.Right.Timothy Taylor.Tom, then Timothy Taylor.Esther Ogle.Right.Arthur Higgins.Right.Alfred Henderson.Right.Amy Frogmore.Amy Freemore, then Amy Frogmore.Albert Snelgrove.Albert Singrore, then Albert Grover.
On another occasion the following result was obtained with cards, Mary, the eldest daughter, being the percipient: In thirty-one successive trials the first only was an entire failure, six of spades being given in answer for the eight of spades. Of the remaining thirty consecutive trials, in seventeen the card was correctly named on the first attempt, nine on the second, and four on the third.
It should here be observed, that according to the calculus of probabilities, the chances that an ordinary guesser would be correct in his guess on the first trial is, in cards, of course, one in fifty-one, but in these trials, numbering 382 in all, and extending over six days, the average was one in three, and second and third guesses being allowed the successes were more than one in two, almost two in three.
The chances against guessing the card correctly five times in succession are more than 1,000,000 to 1, and against this happening eight times in succession are more than 142,000,000 to 1, yet the former happened several times and the latter twice—once with cards and once with fictitious names, the chances against success in the latter case being almost incalculable.
The following experiments were also made among many others, Miss Maud Creery being the percipient:—
“(1) What town have we thought of? A. Buxton: which was correct.
“(2) What town have we thought of? A. Derby. What part did you think of first? A. Railway station. (So did I.) What next? A. The market-place. (So did I.)
“(3) What town have we thought of? A. Something commencing with L. (Pause of a minute.) Lincoln. (Correct.)
“(4) What town have we thought of? A. Fairfield. What part did you think of first? A. The road to it. (So did I.) What next? A. The triangular green behind the Bull’s Head Inn. (So did I.)”
In seeking an explanation for these remarkable results coincidence and chance may, it would seem, be utterly excluded. Touch and hearing must also be excluded, since the guesser did not come in contact with any person during the experiments, and they were conducted in perfect silence excepting the answers of the percipient or the “yes” or “no” of the agent.
We have left, then, only the unconscious indications which might possibly be given by look, movement of a finger, lip, or muscle by persons who were present especially on account of their desire and ability to detect any such communication, and on account of their ability to avoid giving information in any such manner themselves.
It seems, in fact, quite incredible that information thus conveyed could be sufficient to affect the result in so large a number of experiments, especially where the experiments included the names of places and fictitious names of persons. Even where signalling is successfully carried on, as, for instance, in stage tricks, it is a regular feat of memory accomplished between two people who have studied and practised it assiduously for a long time, while here were simply children, brought in contact, without rehearsal, with strangers, whose object it was to detect the trick if any were practised among them.
We are forced, then, to the conclusion that the knowledge which these sensitives exhibited concerning the objects, names, or cards which were given them as tests, did not come to them by any ordinary sense of perception obtained either legitimately or by trick, but came to them directly from the minds of other persons acting as agents and striving to impress them, and that this knowledge or these impressions were received by some means other than through the ordinary channels of communication.
Another method of demonstrating thought-transference which should be mentioned here, is by means of diagrams. The experiment may be made as follows:—The percipient, being blindfolded, is seated at a table with his back to the operator, without contact and in perfect silence. A diagram—for instance, a circle with a cross in the centre—is distinctly drawn by a third person and so held as to be in full view of the operator, who looks at it in silence, steadily and with concentrated attention.
The impression made by the diagram upon the mind of the operator is gradually perceived by the percipient, who, after a time varying from a few seconds to several minutes, declares himself ready. The bandages are then removed from his eyes, and to the best of his ability he draws the impression which came to him while blindfolded. The results have varied in accuracy, very much as did the results in the experiments with objects and cards already described.
The following diagrams are from drawings and reproductions made in the manner just described. They are from the proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, and were the result of experiments made by Mr. Malcolm Guthrie and Mr. James Birchall, two prominent and cultivated citizens of Liverpool, together with three or four ladies, personal friends of theirs, all of whom undertook the experiments with the definite purpose of testing the truth or falsity of thought-transference.
I. Original Drawing.
I. Reproduction.
II. Original Drawing.
II. Reproduction.
III. Original Drawing.
III. Reproduction.
IV. Original Drawing.
IV. Reproduction.
I will also quote another experiment, which is only a fair example of a very large number, carefully carried out from April to November, 1883. In many of the experiments members of the Committee on Thought-transference from the S. P. R. were present.
April 20th, 1883.—Present, Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Birchall, Mr. Steel, and four ladies:—
AGENT.
PERCIPIENT.
OBJECT.
RESULT.
Mrs. E.
Miss R.
A square of pink silk on black satin.
“Pink ... Square.” Answered almost instantly.
do.
do.
A ring of white silk on black satin.
“Can’t see it.”
Miss R.
Miss E.
Word R E S, letter by letter.
Each letter was named correctly by Miss E.as it was placed before Miss R.
do.
do.
Letter Q.
“Q.” First answer.
do.
do.
Letter F.
“F.” First answer.
All present.
Miss R.
A gilt cross held by Mr. G. behindthe percipient.
“It is a cross.” Asked, which way is it held,percipient replied, “The right way.” Correct.
do.
do.
A yellow paper knife.
“Yellow ... is it a feather?... It looks like aknife with a thin handle.”
do.
do.
A pair of scissors standing openand upright.
“It is silver ... No, it is steel ... It is a pairof scissors standing upright.”
Success was different on different occasions, but this represents an ordinary series of experiments at one sitting. In these experiments with objects, the percipient was blindfolded and the object moreover was kept out of range of vision. In some experiments slight contact was permitted, and in some it was not, but it was found that contact had little if any effect upon the result.
Remarkable success was also obtained in the transference of sensation, such as taste, smell, or pain, while the percipient was in a normal condition, that is, not hypnotized.
The following is an average example of the transference of taste:—
The tasters, Mr. Guthrie (M. G.), Mr. Gurney (E. G.), and Mr. Myers (M.). The percipients were two young ladies in Mr. Guthrie’s employ.
Sept. 3, 1883.
TASTERS.
PERCIPIENT.
SUBSTANCE.
ANSWER GIVEN.
E. G. & M.
E.
Worcestershire Sauce.
“Worcestershire Sauce.”
M. G.
R.
"
“Vinegar.”
E. G. & M.
E.
Port wine.
“Between eau de Cologne and beer.”
M. G.
R.
"
“Raspberry Vinegar.”
E. G. & M.
E.
Bitter aloes.
“Horrible and bitter.”
M. G.
R.
Alum.
“A taste of ink—of iron—of vinegar.I feel it on my lips—it is as thoughI had been eating alum.”
Some very striking experiments were made by Mr. J. W. Smith of Brunswick Place, Leeds, as agent, and his sister Kate as percipient. Their success with diagrams fully equalled those already given, and with objects the results have seldom been equalled. The following trials were made March 11th, 1884. The intelligence and good faith of the participants is undoubted.
Agent: J. W. Smith. Percipient: Kate Smith.
Object selected.
Named.
Figure 8
Correct first time.
Figure 5
"""
Black cross on white ground
"""
Color blue
"""
Cipher (0)
"""
Pair of Scissors.—Percipient was not told what (i. e. whatform of experiment, figure, color or object) was to benext—but carefully and without noise a pair of scissorswas placed on white ground, and in about one minuteand a half she exclaimed: “Scissors!”
The number of facts and experiments bearing upon this division of our subject is well-nigh inexhaustible; those already presented will serve as illustrations and will also show upon what sort of evidence is founded the probability that perceptions and impressions are really conveyed from one mind to another in some other manner than by the ordinary and recognized methods of communication.
It remains to give one or two illustrations of the fourth division of the subject, namely, where similar thoughts have simultaneously occurred, or similar impressions have been made upon the minds of persons at a distance from each other without any known method of communication between them.
The first case was received and examined by the society in the summer of 1885. One of the percipients writes as follows:—
“My sister-in-law, Sarah Eustance, of Stretton, was lying sick unto death, and my wife had gone over there from Lawton Chapel (twelve or thirteen miles off) to see and tend her in her last moments. On the night before her death I was sleeping at home alone, and, awaking, I heard a voice distinctly call me.
“Thinking it was my niece Rosanna, the only other occupant of the house, I went to her room and found her awake and nervous. I asked her whether she had called me. She answered: ‘No; but something awoke me, when I heard some one calling.’ On my wife returning home after her sister’s death she told me how anxious her sister had been to see me, craving for me to be sent for, and saying, ‘Oh, how I want to see Done once more!’ and soon after became speechless. But the curious part was that, about the same time that she was ‘craving,’ I and my niece heard the call.”
In answer to a letter of inquiry he further writes:—
“My wife, who went from Lawton that particular Sunday to see her sister, will testify, that as she attended upon her (after the departure of the minister) during the night, she was asking and craving for me, repeatedly saying, ‘Oh, I wish I could see Uncle Done and Rosie once more before I go!’ and soon after she became unconscious, or at least ceased speaking, and died the next day, of which fact I was not aware until my wife returned on the evening of the Fourth of July.”
Mrs. Sewill, the Rosie referred to, writes as follows:—
“I was awakened suddenly, without apparent cause, and heard a voice calling me distinctly, thus: ‘Rosie, Rosie, Rosie.’ We (my uncle and myself) were the only occupants of the house that night, aunt being away attending upon her sister. I never was called before or since.”
The second case is reported by a medical man of excellent reputation to whom the incident was related by both Lady G. and her sister, the percipients in the case. It is as follows:—
“Lady G. and her sister had been spending the evening with their mother, who was in her usual health and spirits when they left her. In the middle of the night the sister awoke in a fright and said to her husband: ‘I must go to my mother at once; do order the carriage. I am sure she is taken ill.’ The husband, after trying in vain to convince his wife that it was only a fancy, ordered the carriage. As she was approaching her mother’s house, where two roads meet, she saw Lady G.’s carriage approaching. As soon as they met, each asked the other why she was there at that unseasonable hour, and both made the same reply:—
“‘I could not sleep, feeling sure my mother was ill, and so I came to see.’ As they came in sight of the house they saw their mother’s confidential maid at the door, who told them, when they arrived, that their mother had been taken suddenly ill and was dying, and that she had expressed an earnest wish to see her daughters.”
The reporter adds:—
“The mother was a lady of strong will and always had a great influence over her daughters.”
Many well-authenticated instances of a similar character could be cited, but the above are sufficient for illustration, which is the object here chiefly in view, and other facts still further illustrating this division of the subject will appear in other relations.
The foregoing facts and experiments are sufficient to indicate what is understood by thought-transference, or telepathy, and also to indicate what might be called the skirmishing ground between the class of psychologists represented by the active workers in the Society for Psychical Research and kindred societies on the one hand, and the conservative scientists, mostly physiologists, who are incredulous of any action of the mind for which they cannot find an appropriate organ and a proper method, on the other.
It is not claimed that thought-transference as here set forth is established beyond all possibility of doubt or cavil, especially from those who choose to remain ignorant of the facts, but only that its facts are solid and their interpretation reasonable, and that thought-transference has now the same claim to acceptance by well-informed people that many of the now accepted facts in physical science had in its early days of growth and development.
The reality of thought-transference being once established, a vast field for investigation is opened up; a new law, as it were, is discovered; and how far-reaching and important its influence and bearing may be upon alleged facts and phenomena which heretofore have been disbelieved, or set down as chance occurrences, or explained away as hallucinations, is at present the interesting study of the experimental psychologist.
CHAPTER II
MESMERISM AND HYPNOTISM—HISTORY AND THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS.
No department of psychical research is at present exciting so widespread an interest as that which is known under the name of Hypnotism; and inquiries are constantly made by those to whom the subject is new, regarding its nature and effects, and also how, if at all, it differs from the mesmerism and animal magnetism of many years ago.
Unfortunately, these questions are more easily asked than answered, and well-informed persons, and even those considered experts in the subject, would doubtless give different and perhaps opposing answers to them. A short historical sketch may help in forming an opinion.
From the remotest periods of human history to the present time, certain peculiar and unusual conditions of mind, sometimes associated with abnormal conditions of body, have been observed, during which unusual conditions, words have unconsciously been spoken, sometimes seemingly meaningless, but sometimes conveying knowledge of events at that moment taking place at a distance, sometimes foretelling future events, and sometimes words of warning, instruction, or command.
The Egyptians and Assyrians had their magi, the Greeks and Romans their oracles, the Hebrews their seers and prophets, every great religion its inspired teachers, and every savage nation had, under some name, its seer or medicine-man.
Socrates had his dæmon, Joan of Arc her voices and visions, the Highlanders their second sight, Spiritualists their mediums and “controls.” Even Sitting Bull had his vision in which he foresaw the approach and destruction of Custer’s army.
Until a little more than a hundred years ago all persons affected in any of these unusual ways were supposed to be endowed with some sort of supernatural power, or to be under external and supernatural influence, either divine or satanic.
About 1773 Mesmer, an educated German physician, philosopher, and mystic, commenced the practice of curing disease by means of magnets passed over the affected parts and over the body of the patient from head to foot. Afterward seeing Gassner, a Swabian priest, curing his patients by command, and applying his hands to the affected parts, he discarded his magnets, concluding that the healing power or influence was not in them, but in himself; and he called that influence animal magnetism.
Mesmer also found that a certain proportion of his patients went into a sleep more or less profound under his manipulations, during which somnambulism, or sleep-walking, appeared. But Mesmer’s chief personal interest lay in certain theories regarding the nature of the newly-discovered power or agent, and in its therapeutic effects; his theories, however, were not understood nor appreciated by the physicians of his time, and his cures were looked upon by them as being simply quackery.
Nevertheless, it was he who first took the whole subject of these abnormal or supranormal conditions out of the domain of the supernatural, and in attempting to show their relation to natural forces he placed them in the domain of nature as proper subjects of rational study and investigation; and for this, at least, Mesmer should be honored.
Under Mesmer’s pupil, the Marquis de Puysegur, the facts and methods relating to the magnetic sleep and magnetic cures were more carefully observed and more fully published. Then followed Petetin, Husson, and Dupotet, Elliotson in England and Esdaile in India. So from Mesmer in 1773 to Dupotet and Elliotson in 1838 we have the period of the “early mesmerists.”
During this period the hypnotic sleep was induced by means of passes, the operators never for a moment doubting that the influence which produced sleep was a power of some sort proceeding from themselves and producing its effect upon the patient.
In addition to the condition of sleep or lethargy, the following conditions were well known to the “early mesmerists”; somnambulism, or sleep-walking, catalepsy, anæsthesia, and amnesia, or absence of all knowledge of what transpired during the sleep. Suggestion during sleep was also made use of, and was even then proposed as an agent in education and in the cure of vice.
This was the condition of the subject in 1842, when Braid, an English surgeon, made some new and interesting experiments. He showed that the so-called mesmeric sleep could be produced in some patients by other processes than those used by the early mesmerists; especially could this be accomplished by having the patient gaze steadily at a fixed brilliant object or point, without resorting to passes or manipulations of any kind.
He introduced the word hypnotism, which has since been generally adopted; he also proposed some new theories relating to the nature of the hypnotic sleep, regarding it as a “profound nervous change,” and he still further developed the idea and use of suggestion. Otherwise no important changes were made by him in the status of the subject. It was not looked upon with favor by the profession generally, and its advocates were for the most part still considered as cranks and persons whose scientific and professional standing and character were not above suspicion.
The period of twenty-five years from 1850 to 1875, was a sort of occultation of hypnotism. Braidism suffered nearly the same fate as mesmerism—it was neglected and tabooed. A few capable and honest men, like Liébeault of Nancy and Azam of Bordeaux, worked on, and from time to time published their observations; but for the most part these workers were neglected and even scorned.
To acknowledge one’s belief in animal magnetism or hypnotism was bad form, and he who did it must be content to suffer a certain degree of both social and professional ostracism. The field was given over to town-hall lectures on mesmerism, by “professors” whose titles were printed in quotation marks even by the local papers which recorded their exploits.
But a change was about to be inaugurated. In 1877 Prof. Charcot, then one of the most scientific, most widely-known, and most highly-esteemed of living physicians, not only in France but in all the world, was appointed, with two colleagues, to investigate the treatment of hysteria by means of metallic disks—a subject which was then attracting the attention of the medical profession in France.
So, curiously enough, it happened that Charcot commenced exactly where Mesmer had commenced a hundred years before. He experimented upon hysterical patients in his wards at La Salpêtrière, and, as a result, he rediscovered mesmerism under the name of hypnotism, just a century after it had been discovered by Mesmer and disowned by the French Academy.
