(2021-06-18, 09:44 AM)Typoz Wrote: Quote from the article linked in the OP.
Sorry, I'm not buying this argument. One could just as well argue that chemistry is not to be trusted because contaminants in the apparatus can influence the results. What is needed is some guidelines and control over the technique of the hypnotist - some do readily introduce expectations, much like leading a witness in a court case. But it needn't be so. Think of the controls in mediumship studies of Julie Beischel for example.
I agree with Stevenson's attitude toward the veracity or validity of hypnotic regression-obtained past life memories. They are too often subconscious confabulations generated to satisfy both the suggestions of the hypnotist and the hopeful aspirations of the patient. From my own experience when I went in for a series of past-life regressions, I found them to be generally unrewarding. The hypnotist would (as is necessary) suggest that I go to the past life experience that was the root of my current problem (without suggesting the nature of this past life), and I could usually tell that my subconscious mind was going through some sort of mentally laborious process trying to come up with something. I was mentally tired afterward.
I think that my finding myself to be mostly unhypnotizable was an indication that I generally don't respond to suggestion in any deep way. And this was the underlying reason for the lack of useful results in the past-life therapy sessions.