As for Harris: this free will stuff

[DRSB]

And yet many of his ideas and his models of what makes up our human ‘selves’ persist, even as they apply to this topic. He was the first to popularise the notion that human beings are at the mercy of unconscious forces deep within us over which we (apparently) have little control.

Not sure about the being first. Actually, William James did more in this respect. As for Freud, he plagiarized his mentors and this is a well-known fact. Also, the book mentioned in the link (I've read it) goes into very specific and documented details about this.

I did my social work degree thesis on the falling out of Freud and Jung (and in retrospect what an utter waste of time it was!) so I know the stuff. James had similar ideas, but Freud, as I say, put them ‘out there’ in the public domain.

As Sean says above, much of what goes on in our amazing brains is of course unconscious, I.e. it happens without our conscious awareness of it happening - and I spell that out because it isn’t a specific thing in the way some would have it. What bothers me is when people, with no real evidence start deciding how it all works. Smacks to me of the same sort of process that religions go through establishing the ‘orthodoxy’.

Freud is the one that made claims without any real evidence. Check out the book I mentioned, this info was not available at the time you wrote your paper, or nobody bothered to look into it. And of course it is a well-known fact that Freud was a cocaine-junkee.

[pErvinalia]

To say that Hitler somehow hypnotised large crowds of people diminishes his influence and the responsibility those people hold for their own actions in my view.

That he was a powerful public speaker is not in doubt. That he appealed to some of the lowest aspects of human nature and fears is also in no doubt. And that he was in the right place at the right time to grasp power in the way he did is also clear. But to suggest hypnotism was partly responsible is fanciful and speculative in my view.

Not partly responsible, but a useful tool he knew hot to use, not the only one, and a narrow definition of hypnotism is not useful either, powerful speakers induce mini-trances,

What's a "mini trance"?

An awake trance, a short one with no big outward signs, yet catalepsy may be there (transfixed) and the parasympathetic nervous system kicks in.

Any evidence of this?

[DRSB]

To say that Hitler somehow hypnotised large crowds of people diminishes his influence and the responsibility those people hold for their own actions in my view.

That he was a powerful public speaker is not in doubt. That he appealed to some of the lowest aspects of human nature and fears is also in no doubt. And that he was in the right place at the right time to grasp power in the way he did is also clear. But to suggest hypnotism was partly responsible is fanciful and speculative in my view.

Not partly responsible, but a useful tool he knew hot to use, not the only one, and a narrow definition of hypnotism is not useful either, powerful speakers induce mini-trances,

What's a "mini trance"?

An awake trance, a short one with no big outward signs, yet catalepsy may be there (transfixed) and the parasympathetic nervous system kicks in.

Any evidence of this?

Yes, the famous examples are automatic auto-pilot actions, highway trances for example, runner's high, such things.

[pErvinalia]

I meant in the case of listening to someone speak.

[Brian Peacock]

[DRSB]

I meant in the case of listening to someone speak.

Yes, listening with a gaping mouth to the Führer, for example is partial catalepsy. The stiff posture of a soldier in itself can trigger the suggestive state associated with it (accepting and acting on commands).
Spectator trance in the cinema, when you're engulfed by what you are watching, some people shed tears, the catharsis in the Greek tragedy... everything that triggers emotional responses...
The emotions are unconscious responses. There is research on how we decide, that it happens unconsciously determined by emotions and is rationalized after the fact, mental shortcuts, state-dependent learning, all these things affect the so called will but cannot be analyzed under a microscope,

[pErvinalia]

That first sentence is a begging the question fallacy.

And of course emotions are effected unconsciously. That doesn't imply a trance state. Otherwise you'd have to consider 100% of a person's existence as being in a "mini trance" state.

[Brian Peacock]

They can't put a jogging jogger in an fMRI machine.

[rainbow]

My bank offered me a free will once.

...but apparently they become executors of your estate and take a healthy cut.

So not really free then is it?

[DRSB]

That first sentence is a begging the question fallacy.

And of course emotions are effected unconsciously. That doesn't imply a trance state. Otherwise you'd have to consider 100% of a person's existence as being in a "mini trance" state.

Of course not, emotions can be a gateway into trance states.
But why talk about trance states? I only brought them up in relation to the subconscious mind influencing the conscious mind in ways difficult to fathom because even if you put a jogger in an MRI-machine, you observe the brain activity. Trances are glimpses into the unconscious activity.

Why not get back on topic? What about the will though? Where is it located? Is it an executive function of the neocortex?

[pErvinalia]

The reason I asked is because "trance" implies some sort of altered state outside of normal existence. Listening to an orator doesn't produce an altered state.

[Svartalf]

I meant in the case of listening to someone speak.

I can witness that I once got "high" from listening to a folk music concern... that was... weird, even to a folk fan like me.

[pErvinalia]

Were you physically there? You probably got high from second hand joint smoke. That happened to me once at a music festival. The best mj high I've ever had.

[Rum]

I realised what’s been niggling me about this ‘trance’ notion. It’s that DSRB is conflating it with behaviour that some people some of the time do when they are not conscious of it. They are not the same thing at all.

[Svartalf]

Were you physically there? You probably got high from second hand joint smoke. That happened to me once at a music festival. The best mj high I've ever had.

no herbal smell in the place, It was a smallish venue and I don't think joints would have been tolerated.