Discussions with Rossi

Rossi has done a gigantic work in describing the mind-body communication. Mainly, there are many primary messengers (for inter-relationships), secondary messengers (for intra-relationships), biological clocks (cycles of gene expression within seconds, minutes, and hours), and a molecular memory (a pool of chemical substances and physiological conditions that together constitute state-dependent memories, learnings, and behaviors). Hypnotherapy can act at any and each of these levels through a creative access (replay) that promotes healing, improvement, and growth. Notice that the more dissociated (repressed, disturbing) is the memory, and the more its retrieval can destabilize it (within about 1-14 days), especially if we use ameliorating approaches. This happens maybe because brain plasticity is safer than stability. We already have some neurological proofs of the fact that in this type of emotional work (which involves the anterior cingulate cortex) hypnosis maybe is the best possible approach, because also the hypnotic susceptibility is produced within that same anterior cingulate cortex. Novelties, surprises, and physical activities (or even body arousals) can activate neurogenesis (production of new brain cells), and the same holds for the hypnotic experiences, because the trance makes possible a quite original and highly creative style of processing informations and memories. In other words, hypnotherapy is a learning process rather than a therapy (newborns already know this very well, because even the famous 'homunculus' shows that hands and mouth occupy 2/3 of the entire sensory-motor cortex in the brain). Many destructive behaviors are just a type of confusion between the necessary inner work of personal development at all levels, and the unnecessary projection of conflicts that are acted out with tragic consequences. Rossi then discusses some paradoxes of hypnosis: for example, hypnosis works not only with relaxed people, but also (and sometimes better) with tensed and nervous ones. Stress and depression can be very positive and important motivational forces toward crisis, soul purging, inner earthquakes, changes, and healings. Hypnosis can get complete transference phenomena and very deep effects of psycho-neuro-physiological nature. This is pure holism. Here we could go above and before the problem of solving a conflict, and we can do that by asking: "why should we make a choice? What about doing both things?". Erickson has discovered that there is no place for manipulation or programming from outside.. it is just a matter of facilitating inner processes. The therapist's directives can be very detrimental here, and to offer interpretations is the most typical therapist's error. In short: "when the therapeutic process is going well, it is the patient who guides the therapist, not the reverse, as practiced in conventional therapy". This creative uncertainty solves the problem of transference and counter-transference. Notice that this creative perspective is the opposite of the typical definition of psychology as the science of prediction and control of behavior, which actually baffles psychologists everyday. In fact, for example, strong emotions can become somatogenic symptoms that often only hypnosis can relieve and nothing else, because in this way the client can enter effectively into symptoms from inside, while the therapist can just try to work on symptoms from outside, with poor results. Biologically, we can say that there are natural variations than some part of the brain can select for healing. Again, "it is not what the therapist says that is important, as much as what the patient does with what the therapist says". Also, any individual is by itself already able to utilize many healing opportunities, for example being attentive and responsive to the common everyday trances. As you can see, the true therapeutic response must be always autonomous. The therapist is practically useless. Every human being can learn to use a lot better what already is available. Almost all the modern hypnotherapy is still the old, obsolete, and unreal approach based on that illusion of programming and leading. It is an essentially unsatisfactory and poor approach. Rossi is almost the only one that showed a consistent and deep knowledge about the true nature of hypnosis. He wrote (The psychobiology of gene expression, page 317): "the locus of control over the therapeutic process remains within the patient, where all the really important inner work is taking place, rather than in the therapist, who can have only marginal intuitions of what the patient really needs to [..]. Patients do not have to waste precious time and mental energy in being constantly concerned with the task of translating their often vague, implicate experiences into an explicit, verbal form just to please the therapist". In short (see Ernest Lawrence Rossi, www.americanpsychotherapy.com, Annals, spring 2005, page 4): "psychotherapists would be wise not to buy into the controversial image of being the know-it-all answer-person portrayed by the popular media". In 22 April 2005 I asked to Rossi: "in 1996 you wrote that Erickson never believed that a psychotherapist can do therapy. I'm absolutely sure that it is exactly so. Dear Ernest, do you seriously think that Erickson ever believed that hypnosis should be done only by MDs and psychologists? Personally I cannot believe it any more, because in my opinion it is now definitely impossible. Ericksonian approach in its nature is AGAINST this limitation. If the old and obsolete idea of hypnosis (that 'under' hypnosis a 'subject' will accept more easily certain suggestions from a guru) is seen today as a mere illusion, then it is no longer possible to consider intuitive interventions as unorthodox, because this obsessive search for the roots seems to be definitely not the only way to promote change.. therefore, hypnotherapy doesn't need a therapist, but just a dynamically-oriented hypnotist, or a PROMOTER (a CATALYST). I like the term 'promoter' because it is used ALSO in genetics, where it is really a gene promoter! I think you will like it, too!! Of course, in order to promote, the promoter needs to understand what is available for some promotion. And being all the material to promote extremely personal and unique, well, I don't think that it could be found on psychology books. In short, Ericksonian hypnosis cannot distinguish between lay and licensed hypnosis, but only between intuitive operators and dull operators. If I'm not wrong, the I.Q. of Erickson was 191. Ericksonian hypnosis is NOT for all therapists. Most of them are not dynamically oriented, and (I'm sorry) they never will be, and therefore they won't do DIRECT interventions - I mean hypnotic utilization on the fly". Rossi's answer to my discourse has been this: "Alberto, I agree that the word 'promoter' or 'facilitator' are excellent terms for what we do. Much of the question of who should do therapeutic hypnosis and psychotherapy is political/professional issue about which everyone seems to have their own idea. Carl Jung liked to use the term 'Psychopomp' from the middle ages to describe how an older more experienced monk would guide a younger initiate his psychological and spiritual development". Copyright (C) Alberto Torelli.