Has any one watched Derren Brown perfomance.
http://www.derrenbrown.co.uk/
It seems that subconscious mind is very powerful. We are influenced by it mostly unknowingly and often our conscious mind dismiss decision make by subconcious mind based on rational thinking.
I have no doubt that Thiaooubans have used such techniques before.
Derren Brown
Moderator: Moderators
-
anonymousbeing
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:06 pm
Yes, I went through all his stuff, looks to be o.k and sounds to make a whole lot of sence, I have meet people who have done that to me in the past, in sales, and even people that have tried to manipulate me ect.
The only thing is someone can not mess with your head, unless you buy into them, you need to buy into them before they can do it, to repel this you need to “Ki down” ,Were you short circuit anything they are trying to do by refusing to participate in there "Head game".
Or you can play along, but you need to be aware right from the get go that they are trying to manipulate you.
In one of his examples he had some medical students and was inducing pain, he asked did anyone not want to do it?, one said no, so he asked her to leave the room, all she had to do was say "no I will not leave the room" and he would have started to come unglued, when she obeyed she gave him authority, almost like a spell, if she had remained in the room he would have had a really hard time getting the others to fall in consciously together Because she would have been the odd one out.
Also, he got agreement to give them pain by asking did they "want to participate", so he got leverage, they have agreed to it.
The only thing is someone can not mess with your head, unless you buy into them, you need to buy into them before they can do it, to repel this you need to “Ki down” ,Were you short circuit anything they are trying to do by refusing to participate in there "Head game".
Or you can play along, but you need to be aware right from the get go that they are trying to manipulate you.
In one of his examples he had some medical students and was inducing pain, he asked did anyone not want to do it?, one said no, so he asked her to leave the room, all she had to do was say "no I will not leave the room" and he would have started to come unglued, when she obeyed she gave him authority, almost like a spell, if she had remained in the room he would have had a really hard time getting the others to fall in consciously together Because she would have been the odd one out.
Also, he got agreement to give them pain by asking did they "want to participate", so he got leverage, they have agreed to it.
By their deeds shall you know them.
J.C
J.C
It is interesting what you say Shezmear. I've read your other thread about your experience being in a cult too.Shezmear wrote: In one of his examples he had some medical students and was inducing pain, he asked did anyone not want to do it?, one said no, so he asked her to leave the room, all she had to do was say "no I will not leave the room" and he would have started to come unglued, when she obeyed she gave him authority, almost like a spell, if she had remained in the room he would have had a really hard time getting the others to fall in consciously together Because she would have been the odd one out.
Also, he got agreement to give them pain by asking did they "want to participate", so he got leverage, they have agreed to it.
If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you always got.
You know...I still think about that whole cult thing, and the whole thing was helped along by me "going along" with things that I could of at any point just said, "you know...I’m not doing this" and stepped out of it.
What I have learned is when you know little, it is very hard to make comparisons which are essential in being able to discern what is true and false.
When I was in the U.S.A studying Psych-K, they spoke about rapport and the ability to get in sink with people; and said it is a tool, I put up my hand up and asked but what about intent?
They said intent does not matter… we got into a bit of an argument about that...
Anyway…
I think why you want to be in rapport with some one should be asked first before you start teaching people how to do it.
This guy says rapport is a big part of what he does.
In fact when I read TP I noted at various points Thao uses rapport with Michel, or should I say an understanding of psychology to manipulate him, one could say for his ultimate good.
What I have learned is when you know little, it is very hard to make comparisons which are essential in being able to discern what is true and false.
When I was in the U.S.A studying Psych-K, they spoke about rapport and the ability to get in sink with people; and said it is a tool, I put up my hand up and asked but what about intent?
They said intent does not matter… we got into a bit of an argument about that...
Anyway…
I think why you want to be in rapport with some one should be asked first before you start teaching people how to do it.
This guy says rapport is a big part of what he does.
In fact when I read TP I noted at various points Thao uses rapport with Michel, or should I say an understanding of psychology to manipulate him, one could say for his ultimate good.
By their deeds shall you know them.
J.C
J.C
His website gave me a weird feeling too.Lena wrote:who is this guy? what does he do? his website is sort of obnoxious, imo
Though I watched his DVD's "Inside Your Mind" and "Messiah" recently.
I tell you this guy is growing sympatethic to me. In his documentary "Messiah" he journeys to America, where he is not known very much, and plays 5 different characters who claim to be "psychic".
His first character is a "mindreader", second is able to "convert people to Christianity by touch", third "reads a person's dreams via a 'Dream Machine' that is run by crystal power", forth is claiming to be an UFO abductee and last but not least his fifth character is able "to talk to the dead".
He stresses that he possesses none of the before mentioned "abilities", but only want to test if people will doubt and ask: "Is it a trick?", to which question he would gladly answer: "Yes, it is."
If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you always got.
-
anonymousbeing
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:06 pm
The image he has of us is not us since it is just an image he has. It is his image, it tells us more about him than his image tells something about us. He, incorrectly, projects his ignorance of the 'powerful mind', which is another believe he has, unto us, whatever we are. Or am I doing now the same thing??Yothu wrote:Anonymous, what do you know about us precisely?anonymousbeing wrote:The mind [...] We, in this forum, know very little about it and even how to use it...
We all know the familiar line: Mind over Matter. But isn't it odd that everyone who claims to know anything about mind over matter says that one must be quiet from the inside? That while reading a book one should not hear yourself speaking the words, thinking the words. Isn't it odd that Mind over Matter is not about Mind at all?? It is rather about no-Mind...
Regarding the 'powerful mind', this is the same. The mind isn't powerfull, it is just a collection of thoughts, an apparatus, a process that is similar to thinking. Mind equals thinking. Mind isn't a thing, it is a process, it is thinking itself. To paraphase Osho: it should be called minding. And how powerfull is minding?? Well, it isn't.
Then if the mind, the thoughts themselves, aren't powerful, what about trauma and such?? Clearly trauma plays inside the mind. How come people go mad about something which isn't powerful, about something which only shouts words?? Because they give it power. They give it attention, or instead refuse it. Then it becomes powerful. Not because of the mind, but because of themselves. That is where the power is. Not inside the mind but that in which the mind resides.
But people even forget that. That there is something beyond the mind. Because of the beyond the mind is, without it no mind could ever exist. Without the primordial awareness no mind could ever be, who would listen to it?? Who would listen to such stupid rambling?? Really...
It is just like with a queen, you could say a queen is powerful, but where does her power come from?? We give the queen power just as we give the mind power. Then later on when someone searches the mind for power he won't find it. The mind is as powerless as a queen when her kingdom falls away.
And then you say: "We know nothing about it." In the future be honest, be a man and say: "I know nothing about it." And then I can say: "Me neither."
Don't read my signature.
Ahh, this is tricky. If I say what I mean with "be a man" it doesn't mean I always mean that particular thing when I say "be a man". My usage of words, and their meaning, is very flexible. Instead of focusing on one word, or on a group of words, one should never dissect the sentence. My words, and perhapse everybodies words, only get their meaning through the sentence. If you dissect the sentence and watch all the words seperately, or in groups of 2 or 3, you will not read the same thing as when you read the sentence as a whole. However, in the sentence in which I used it, the sentence you qouted, it more or less meant being an honest man, being an authentic man. A man which instead of hiding behind a group puts it directly by saying I don't know. That man I mean. And that man might as well be a woman.shezmear wrote:Alisima you said.
And then you say: "We know nothing about it." In the future be honest, be a man and say: "I know nothing about it." And then I can say: "Me neither."
A man?
What happens if you are a women?
What do you mean exactly by "be a man"?
Don't read my signature.
Come on guys, let's take it easy. 
I can only speak for myself. I wanted to know how anonymousbeing came to his conclusion. His statement kind of teased me.
Derren Brown's films amaze me pretty much, because he shows how easily somebody is "convinced" to follow his, Derren's will, rather than his own. When Mr Brown approaches most of his subjects he does not spend time on any introductory words or anything, he directly "slips into the other's mind" and starts suggesting commands to him/her. He does not seem to aim for interaction with the subject at all.
I can only speak for myself. I wanted to know how anonymousbeing came to his conclusion. His statement kind of teased me.
Derren Brown's films amaze me pretty much, because he shows how easily somebody is "convinced" to follow his, Derren's will, rather than his own. When Mr Brown approaches most of his subjects he does not spend time on any introductory words or anything, he directly "slips into the other's mind" and starts suggesting commands to him/her. He does not seem to aim for interaction with the subject at all.
If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you always got.