Derren Brown and Belief - C4

BrendanBurgess

I hadn't really thought much about hypnotism before until this thread. I gather from reading skepdic.com that there is no altered state of consciousness - that it is just a state of high suggestibility. I did not know that so I have learnt something - thanks for pointing it out to me.

Assuming that Derren Brown is not cheating, he has managed to manipulate the suggestibility of his subjects to convince atheists to believe in God. That is in itself an extraordinary skill, although it is not of course a paranormal power. I have never seen Derren Brown claiming paranormal powers.

How does he manipulate people's suggestibility like that? I would have thought that it would have been obvious to the viewers. Could anyone read a book on this area and start converting people from atheism? Could I as a skeptic and atheist be converted by the likes of Derren Brown or by attending an evangelical religious ceremony?

Turley

BrendanBurgess wrote:

How does he manipulate people's suggestibility like that? I would have thought that it would have been obvious to the viewers. Could anyone read a book on this area and start converting people from atheism? Could I as a skeptic and atheist be converted by the likes of Derren Brown or by attending an evangelical religious ceremony?

Brendan-
You have raised some interesting issues. If you would like to know how hypnotism is done Ormond McGill is a leading author on hypnotism. There is a lot literature available if you search online. You might enjoy performing.

It is an interesting point that you thought it would have been obvious to the viewers. I think most people would agree with you. Most people do not think they are easily fooled. But they are, and they are especially vulnerable when they are self-confident.

Everyone that studies the art will not be as successful as Mr. Brown. There are many magicians and not all are as successful. Derren Brown began his career mastering magic (sleight of hand), mentalism and hypontism. He is talented and creative using new methods of combining the three arts.

It is interesting to ponder that masses of people can be led or misled by men. We can be misled to accept things that are false as true, evil as good. We can be misled to war. It is wise to know we can be fooled by men.

It would be prudent to be skeptical of those men we know have fooled us before. If God is the infallible eternal Truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived, Derren Brown is a clue to where men should place their complete trust.
-Turley

Myksyk

Turley wrote:

Derren Brown is an entertainer. He is a skilled magician.

A mentalism or hypnotism show requires that the performer pretend to have special powers. If the entertainer stated up front that he or she was a magician performing tricks the show would become a guessing game of how it is done. Unlike a magic show, mentalism and hypnotism, offers the audience an explanation of "how it is done." It is a false explanation, but this is what makes the show work.

The fact that some people actually believe a mentalists or hypnotists unbelievable effects are due to some extraordinary power demonstrates how easy it is to fool the public. DB does not have the ability to read minds but he can't admit this to his fans.

I do not see any need for skepticism about the "mind reading power" of the magician/entertainer Derren Brown. It is a very good show but it just a show. One could also be skeptical that a theatrical play is not real because the characters are just acting.

Yes ... I think pH was missing these points somehow. The trickery and deceit are part of the show - these are essential tools of the mentalist. Derren Brown does not believe he has supernatural powers but he will play up this possibility with his audience. He is an entertainer as you say and a brilliant one at that.

pH

What point exactly have I missed?

Derren Brown is a magician - pure and simple. He has no powers of Hypnotism, suggestion or Psychology. He performs very standard magic tricks using sleight of hand and technical devices.

No one on Derren's show has been hypnotised or suggested to do anything.

Derren does not need to 'read' someones body language to achieve any of his effects.

Since day 1 of mind control DB has gone out of his way to make his show look like anything but magic.

Under sustained pressure C4 removed his web site from their 'Science' section and placed it back where it belongs under 'Entertainment'

Derren has consisently used Camera edits and Audio dubs not to achieve the effect, but to misinform the Audience as to how the trick takes place.

If Derren presented himself as a straight magician then he would not have a TV career. How many magic shows are on TV these days? Compare this to all the cold-readers, haunted houses, proof positives etc. It's clear to see what a magican need to do to get on TV.

I think we probably agree with all the above. The only difference is the conclusion we draw. You say that all the above if fair for a TV mentalist, I kind of agree!!

Fine if he's doing a TV magic show like Mind Control or Russian Roullette. But when he produces a 'Skeptical' documentary he needs to be open and scientific.

Turley

pH wrote:

Derren has consisently used Camera edits and Audio dubs not to achieve the effect, but to misinform the Audience as to how the trick takes place.

Not unlike television news.

pH wrote:

If Derren presented himself as a straight magician then he would not have a TV career. How many magic shows are on TV these days? Compare this to all the cold-readers, haunted houses, proof positives etc. It's clear to see what a magican need to do to get on TV.

You could look at it another way and ask if a TV news anchor presented hismself straight as an agent of the government he would not have a TV career either. How many CIA agents or MI6 agents are on TV these days? It should also be clear to see what a journalist needs to do to get a top job on TV.
;-)

A CIA agent once told me, "Nothing changes but the uniform, the weapons, and the transportation."

robindch

If God is the infallible eternal Truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived, Derren Brown is a clue to where men should place their complete trust.

Two logical fallacies in one day -- not bad! This one's referred to as 'begging the question' and a definition and example live here. Enjoy!

- robin.

Turley

robindch wrote:

If God is the infallible eternal Truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived, Derren Brown is a clue to where men should place their complete trust.

Two logical fallacies in one day -- not bad! This one's referred to as 'begging the question' and a definition and example live here. Enjoy!

Robin-
The begging the question fallacy requires that the truth of the conclusion is claimed or assumed in the premise. Specifically where is the conclusion, "Derren Brown is a clue to where men should place their complete trust" claimed or assumed within the premise "If God is the infallible eternal Truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived?"
-Turley

robindch

Specifically where is the conclusion, "Derren Brown is a clue to where men should place their complete trust" claimed or assumed within the premise "If God is the infallible eternal Truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived?"

Your final conclusion concerning where men should place their trust requires your premise that god exists as stated, thus begging the question concerning god's existence and his intention. Perhaps the circularity is easier to see if I rephrase it (equivalently, including the implied consequent) as 'If God is the infallible eternal Truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived, then we should trust [which implies a belief in the truth of the verb's object] in God who is the infallible eternal truth that can neither deceive nor be deceived.' Or, put more simply, 'If X is true, then we should believe that X is true'.

QED.

- robin.

Myksyk

pH wrote:

What point exactly have I missed?

Derren Brown is a magician - pure and simple. He has no powers of Hypnotism, suggestion or Psychology.

Of course he has 'powers of suggestion' ... we all do! You can suggest things to people and if you have set up the situation correctly and they are suggestible you may influence them in this way (how do you think the placebo works when used deliberately?). And of course he uses psychology (I'm not sure what you mean by 'powers ...of psychology') ... all magicians are familiar with and utilise fundamental psychological knowledge about areas such as perception, memory, influence, attention, conformity, social pressure, emotion, suggestibility etc etc. As a psychologist I can tell you that magicians I have met often know more psychology and use more psychology than the professionals!! I don't think he is saying that he 'has' unusual or special psychological powers; just that he uses psychology as a fundamental part of his act (he may ham this up to freak the audience out, believing that he has somehow reached into their mind ... but that's standard practice for a mentalist!!). Hypnotism is a different matter and may just fall under suggestion.

Derren has consisently used Camera edits and Audio dubs not to achieve the effect, but to misinform the Audience as to how the trick takes place.

If it's a tv audience he's trying to fool then why not use whatever tricks at his disposal .. if it freaks your mind out then he's done his job!

pH

Of course he has 'powers of suggestion' ...

I was originally using the 'Power of Suggestion' to cover all the NLP rubbish that is talked about.

If you're saying that DB uses any form of suggestion to achieve any of the effects in Messiah then please give me a clear example from Messiah of this.

If it's a tv audience he's trying to fool then why not use whatever tricks at his disposal .. if it freaks your mind out then he's done his job!

Absolutely not!!!!

For TV magic to make any sense there have to be ground rules. If you allow camera trickery then any TV magic instantly becomes meaningless.

- The camera (and audio!) have to be a fair representation of what a live audience member has seen.

- Members of the public have to be members of the public! I.e. the trick would have worked just the same if it has been you there checking the ropes were tight.

If these rules are broken anyone can make elephants vanish, read peoples minds etc. It's just mind numbingly pointless.

Turley

robindch wrote:

Perhaps the circularity is easier to see if I rephrase it (equivalently, including the implied consequent)

My original statement DID NOT include the implied consequent. You rewrote the sentence to satisfy your argument. You have employed two of the Seventeen Techniques For Truth Suppression. Number 4 (creating your own straw man) and number 13 (changing the subject) can be found at
http://www.dcdave.com/article3/991228.html

Turley

pH wrote:

If you're saying that DB uses any form of suggestion to achieve any of the effects in Messiah then please give me a clear example from Messiah of this.

It would be unethical to expose the methods of Derren Brown in this public forum, if anyone here knew his methods. If you are sincerely interested in how he uses suggestion he has written two books for magicians that you could probably purchase online, Pure Effect and Absolute Magic. These books may not contain all of his methods but they are a start.

pH wrote:

For TV magic to make any sense there have to be ground rules. If you allow camera trickery then any TV magic instantly becomes meaningless.

- The camera (and audio!) have to be a fair representation of what a live audience member has seen.

It only becomes meaningless if you admit to camera trickery. Cameras only have to appear to be a fair representation. It is all about appearances. The appearance of reality "is" reality to the television viewer. David Copperfield caused the Statute of Liberty to disappear in NYC on television. Of course he didn't really make it disappear but it looked good. Television is the great deceiver. The public believes what it sees on TV. It becomes reality. Even if something never happened, people will respond, "BUT I SAW IT ON TV!"

I remember a TV program I saw back in July of 1969 that was really out of this world.

robindch

My original statement DID NOT include the implied consequent.

'fraid it did. '...is a clue...' is the implier, with 'trust' (in god) as the implied consequent.

You rewrote the sentence to satisfy your argument.

Nope, I rewrote the sentence in successively clearer and simpler terms, so that you could understand it, as you did (you'll recall) ask me to explain myself

You have employed two of the Seventeen Techniques For Truth Suppression

Sounds absolutely frightful, but if you do take the time to understand my reasoning, you should be able to see that all I did was point out a rather obvious circularity in your argument -- nothing at all to do with supression of truth, but rather a search for it!

BTW, who's this dcdave chappie whom you continually refer to? Are he and you the same guy? Your writing styles (them again!) are different, but that's hardly a clincher.)

Happy to help!

- robin.

Turley

robindch wrote:

if you do take the time to understand my reasoning, you should be able to see that all I did was point out a rather obvious circularity

I'm getting dizzy.