User blogs

I've railed against many things on this site, but it's this one I have always hated the most. To me, the psychologist is a bastard child of religion and modern academic dogma. He or she fills a role in society that is niether earned, nor understood by them in the slightest. Many long years ago, in your local village there might have been a shaman, or a wise man or wise woman. They practiced the hidden arts with benevolence and love, and helped their neighbors solve problems in a healthy way. They also used many techniques almost completely lost to us, to predict important weather patterns that would have a good or bad effect on crops. 

The catholic church sought to erradicate this person in the late medieval period and replace them with a priest, who takes orders from and reports to the bishop, who reports to the pope. This way they could affect complete control over every province/people who converted, and even to this day it allows them huge influence over countries and governments.

With this in mind we can see how, the academites, in their never ending quest to dominate thought and discourse in modern nations, sought to replace the priest with their psychologists. You may ask then, what is the difference between the priest and the therapist? Which is worse? I say they are the same thing.

Just like the priest goes to seminary to learn the bible, the psychologist goes to college to learn the DSM. Academia is the same as organized religion in the sense that it does not seek to solve problems as much as control people's thinking in such a way as to prevent them. Therefore, I believe that Academia is not a huge step forward from religion, save for it's respect with the regards to objective science. But is it really that objective?

Why should I believe some 34 year old manboy whos only experience outside mom's house was college/seminary/other bullshit factories and controlled environments, when our real elders and the people we should be listening to/getting counsel from are left to die in bland nursing homes? This is a fucking crime against humanity that keeps getting perpetrated every generation in worse ways.

Real science is simply not firmly grounded. What you were sure was true yesterday might be proven wrong tomorrow. And maybe, after a few years, THAT might be proven wrong again and you might be right.  The key to having an open mind is true and unfiltered scepticism, and acute self awareness. You have to constantly ask yourself these questions to be truly scientific:

Am I biased?
Why am I biased?
Does this just feel good, or is it real?
Why does this feel good if it isn't real?
Is this fake because I don't like it?
If it's real why do I not like it?

Many people will disagree with me, but I believe mankind was doing some things right back in ancient times. We need to return to a decentralized, self sufficent, and individually self reliant species. How then, collectivists, can we be a community if the members of the community have no individual value? Today we are a dependant, domestic society. Our churches and our schools don't want us to think. They want us to all be mindless sheep. That is why all free/healthy thinkers live lonely lives. But let the sheep wallow in their own filth under the crook of their negligent and cruel sheperds. When they call me crazy I just laugh harder. Whats crazier than surrendering your personality to become a cartoon character?

As we all know, when you meet a person in public at any event or gathering place, you are not meeting them usually. You are meeting who they want people to think they are. With the advent of the internet, people can now indulge wholesale in anything that they enjoy in nearly complete privacy from others within the community they physically live. As a satanist, I see no problem in this. I love debauchery and sin. But I also understand it is my responsibility to police my own degeneracy so that it does not do damage to others. With this in mind, it's time we talk about IAFs, or internet acquired fetishes. Suffice to say, I believe there is injustice here. For the sake of reference I will describe Each IAF in it's own section.

1.Zoophilia
As most people with a solid upbrining know, it is wrong to have sex with animals, rather its consentual or not. Many have heard of, for example, furries. Now it can be said that not all furries are zoophiles, and not all zoophiles are furries. It is however, a cold fact that some do engage in it. This is completely a product of the internet age, as fandoms never really had the potential for rapid expansion as they do now. This is one of the several very disturbing ones. I've met many furs and for the most part have always found them absolutely insufferable.
There is also the issue of girls having sex with male dogs. Now I'm sure this was around before the internet was, but many girls started doing it after likely hearing about it on tumblr or reddit. Think it's not a big issue? guess again. This can lead to disease, infection, and other things. After all how clean is dog dick? I certainly wouldn't want to pound a hole that a dog had been in. 

2. pedophilia
We all know about this one, but I don't think most understand the magnitude the problem has reached. Loli/shota/futaba/other anime related porn material creates a new pedo every day, and little can be done to stop it, as it is not illegal for some reason. Not only are groups in the US actively pushing for pedo acceptance, But they also are forming online communities around the issue.
Acceptance groups are a problem in my view, because instead of people who just think a 20 year old shouldn't get the book thrown at them for diddling a highschooler who lied about their age, They want ALL pedophilic acts to become legal and accepted. Sexual manipulation/exploitation is wrong to do to anybody, but especially children because of the damage it does to them later in life. Literally throwing the baby out with the bath water will not fix this issue. I was a victim of a pedo growing up and it caused a lot of psychological damage, somehow luckily I'm pretty normal and sane these days but that took effort.
The internet is a breeding ground for all sorts of perversion. IAF pedophilia is exactly the same/worse than regular pedophilia. 

In conclusion I suppose it is up to you to decide what you think is right and wrong. What is healthy, and what is unhealthy. I left out some other IAFs I know about because they weren't as bad/cringey but I am of the belief they ar ALL bad. Sex is ment to be a much more personal thing than what is provided by pornagraphy. It could even be said the "incel threat" meme was created by this filth. These people know full well that they are being targeted based on genetics/race with this garbage, and yes it makes them mad. From the smart ones I've talked to, they say the most frustrating thing is that although they can plainly see what's being done to them, the outside world sees them in a framed narrative and does not pour out the affection and acceptence they do for other much worse people. In fact, it only seeks to corrupt them more and more until they can be held up and used a justification for further evils, and then unceremoniously dumped in a hole and forgotten.

When will we, as a society, take action against the menace of internet porn? When will we stand up and say, "If you can censor us but we can't censor you, that is WRONG? Just because you can fap to something doesn't mean you should. "

I'm no puritan, or christian. I just see porn addiction causing all the same problems religion does to our culture and society. Porn is just as manipulative as religion. I choose to indulge with respect and caution, but I'm in a sea of people who never took care in their indulgence, or understood the results of it.

The entire idea of a religion without a god and cult of personality around a leader, is so foreign to some people, and scary to the establishment, Extraterrestrials and nuclear war have to take a back seat to it. Theistic ideology is a tube that always leads to the same dystopian garbage dump. The whole Idea of worship has been proven to be as dumb as kneeling in front of a T rex and saying "please don't eat me." If you don't get devoured, you'll for sure get crushed and trampled. Only two outcomes, unless you're smart and you just shot the bastard. I bring this up on a satanist website because to my understanding of true satanism, it is the first truly ANTI theistic religion. I believe anti theism is what MAKES satanism a religion.

The difference between a satanist and just an atheist is obvious if you know where to look. I don't just doubt the existence of god, but I abhor the idea of worship. Just your run of the mill christ denyer might for example claim god doesn't exist, and then run off and go worship something even dumber. Is it a certain feeling of superiority over the natural and supernatural?or is it a realization of equality? Is it hypocritical to say god is a load of horse shit and then worship your favorite actor or politician? I say yes. I can also prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt. 

It takes a special kind of person to completely deny any authority but their own, and these people tend to have awful social skills and do not actively recruit. That's the simple reason why the idea hasn't really caught on. Maybe that's by design, but if it is, it doesn't really change anything. The conclusion is always the same, and the procedure for dealing with the thought process is the same. You simply stand on a hill and crow, "nothing is above me". If a piano doesn't crush you suddenly you can be reasonably assured there is no supernatural force which governs the universe, or you.

To those who refer to themselves as "theistic satanists" I have only one statement. Dumbass. The theistic satanist tends to fit a disticnt profile. The former christian or other uninformed person who believes in satan as a personal entity and Identifies as a servant of satan. 

The true comedy in this, is if you research the biblical beginnings of satan within the abrahamic realm, satan himself is a servant. Aside from his first cameo as a snake tempting eve to poach apples,(there is contention if this was even satan at all) he shows up in the book of jobe. In this instance, satan is employed by god as a judicial prosecutor of sorts. The entire epoch describes satan torturing and tempting jobe IN SERVICE of god. So if we are to view theistic satanists in the frame of them believing in the biblical satan, the biblical satan is a servant of god, so therefore theistic satanists are chirstians. whoops.

I am not however, unaware of the luciferian aspect. Satanism did not start with Anton Lavey, or general Aquino, and it will not end with Lucien griefs and the triggered snowflake temple. The history goes back 100s of years. To think that moral freedom and the rejection of dogma is anything recent is pure lunacy. We remember names like Alleister Crowley, Albert Pike, and even further back, John Dee and Edward Kelly, all impotant figures who set down what later became things like the left hand path, and pioneered the concepts that have become modern magick and science, even psychology.

The simple and disturbing fact is, "going where no man has gone before" is often an either suicidal or homicidal journey. Very few great expeditions in history have been legal or bloodless. The freedom we have today IS something new. Just 100 years ago, for example, if you were caught doing anything but christian rituals, or fucking anyone but who you're legally married to, you could be fucking executed. So yes, the occult has been underground for many years. I put in for consideration that satanist thinking and theory has also been under ground for much of it's history. We should Honor the people who gave us what we have today, even if they did think there was a lucifer who was a bearer of light.

It's a step forward from the bible. 

The billionaires in the owl cult aren't really satanists either in my opinion. I also don't think they take the owl cult as serious as christians think they do. Everybody saw Alex Jone's video of the cremation of care. And people that were using their brains noticed that it was a statue with a speaker in it. I believe we had something similar at one of the cub scout meetings I attended growing up. I'd be embarrassed if somebody saw a video of that, and I'm sure bill clinton or whoever felt similar. That being said, the owl cult shouldn't be confused with satanism. I'd join if invited though, they seem to be doing something right given their level of wealth. Most likely it comes from math skills and a fraternal closed lips policy. Copying the catholic church seems to be much more lucrative than black magic, but don't listen to me.

In conclusion, I'll make a simple statement. We as satanists, should not let the church, or the mundanes, project onto us an image that they make. Because when you believe any of the things said about satanism by people who have no idea what it is, you become just as religious as they are. I reject god, therefore I reject his texts, and his servants. Why must we be so defined by our naysayers? I find myself ironically waving a pentagram and saying "the power of logic compells you" when somebody tries to invade my psyche with dumb propaganda. Im an anti theist. God has no power because there is no god. I don't care about the president because hes just a fat golfer. I don't care about Kanye West because hes just a bad rapper. I don't really care about anything but myself. It's taken nearly 500 years for scholars to admit nothing is wrong with this.

              Online abuse for dummies
   a guide to winning online arguments

Some people have had a wonderful and wholesome experience on the internet so far. It's true that if you're good looking and very normal, you'll mostly get a positive response if you make sure to stay within the confines of facebook and well modded subreddits. Others however, know all too well the hurt that has been caused by simply typed sentences. Some have even killed themselves over it. Some have also fought, and been successful at it. 

This article is about how you can troll, argue, and rebel rouse without damage to your personality. All the subject matter I will mention here is for your benefit, I'm not trying to start a fight, I don't start shit as much anymore out of apathy and having a life nowadays to be honest. I however think SIN would get a lot from this knowledge.

A bit about me for reference, I came from a certain culture on the internet that is as old as it is dark. At 15 I scrolled limewire in the twilight years of the free internet. I was there in the early 2000s, before google came in with facebook and their army of regular plebs, hell bent on doxxing us all, and clamping down on our freedom. We fought to the last, but we were defeated, and became social outcasts (If we weren't already at this point).

I heard the call to arms again in 2015, and at the indignation of seeing the internet suddenly flooded with shitty propaganda, I stood side by side with some rednecks, the lolbertarians and others that didn't like being told what to say. I've never given up on my anti censorship and anti corporate views, and I've never backed down from a fight. I'm no hero, but I've had just about everything you can think of typed to me at some point. 

Like a true satanist, I don't really care about following leaders or ideology, I just like to make fun of people that do.

The first things to do if you want to win arguments are simple
1. Be actually right. this goes a long way for obvious reasons
2. Do your research on the topic
3. An enemy of your enemy is not always your freind.
4. Speak clearly
5. Write well and avoid typos

These may be simple but the process is a deceptively hard one. To be one step ahead of the enemy consistently is always essential in intellectual warfare. If you give them and inch, you'll lose a mile. 

Start by making a solid statement you know to be correct, in a place where you know people will argue with you. Christians like to come on here all the time and try this, and luckily Zach has a sense of humor and lets them stay and get their beliefs slaughtered in the forums. This is a solid way to start arguments when you're first getting started. 

However there are other, more devious methods for sure. This is a classic I like to call, the troll in sheep's clothing:

step one: select cringy online community that will have turbo nerds who aren't used to confrontation.

step two: find what boards they post on, what games they play, try to discover where they congregate in one place. 

step three: post there as a new member. Be engaging, make them feel superior to you. Make them think they are mentoring a like mind. Before too long there will be many responses and people watching the post.

Step four: slowly start to argue and refute them. Tell them why you don't like things and why they are weird for liking it. 

Step five: When everyone is enraged, start posting porn and gore, until you get banned or bored. Alternate to step four if you don't wanna talk to them but just piss them off.

                                pandering and impersonation

another controversial form of attack is to pander to the enemy while also making them look bad. This has alot of uses when fighting antifa or the Nazi wanna betards (I hate both) You can actually cause them to defect from their cause by at first befreinding them online as a fellow radical, and then indirectly showing them how cringy they are. They think they defected with a freind, but were actually swayed by an enemy. 

Impersonation is a technique people have been using to start wars for centuries. It works like this, conspiracy buffs know it as the "false flag":

dress up like the enemy and attack yourself to justify war. Or, alternatively, you can also infiltrate your enemy and suggest they attack you for real. either way, always a good technique for starting a good row anywhere.

                                           conclusions

people think that being a keyboard warrior is easy. That's why they fail and look like idiots. Intellectual warfare is one of the highest and most potent means of establishing your own views, while providing healthy counterweight to the status quo. SIN is now well armed with the fun and interesting tactics of basic online psychological warfare. May you have victory in your online engagements, and bayonet the survivors with an evil glint in your eye.

I'm not gunna get all emo or post pictures of pepe the frog hanging himself on /b/ and talk about how much my life sucks. Somehow, I still have some dignity left. I grew up watching my friends get tricked into living the way the establishment wants. If I thought that was scary I was terrified when I saw all others who rebelled get mentally and physically broken down to nothing. Did I really survive the dismal results of pushing away from the norm? I wonder sometimes. All I know is it's worth it. This is how I view the world, and some friendly advice for those who look through the glass of life and see the same things I do.

I feel like I know too much. The simple pleasures still enjoyed by people are lost to me. I don't have a family. I have few friends I've known for more than a year. I know all these things are essentially worthless. If somebody became a burden, I dropped them. If somebody became a liability, I stopped talking to them or associating. I also never explained myself when I did. I just knew they were hurting me and looked out for number 1. But more importantly, I realized most people don't live in reality.

If some idiot wants to make comments about how reality is subjective, you can fuck right off. Reality is, and has always been objective. If you think it isn't you've been eating too much acid.

I know what is true and what isn't, and it took me a very long time to get a clear picture. The schools, the church, and the establishment have hard protocols in place to control people. How else do you convince a grown man to legally bind himself to a woman, work the same job for 40 years and raise ungrateful children that leave him in a nursing home forgotten and dying? How else do you get desperately sick people to send money to a church so they will "pray for them". It takes a hard yolk to control the mind of man. 

The establishment says, "Don't do drugs, you can't handle it". They don't exactly want people smoking a joint and realizing getting on disability is better than working. Drugs and drinking often puts a chink in the false reality they present, either harmful or helpful. It's my theory they invented the idea of addiction to make sure nobody used drugs or drank with a bit of discipline. Of course if you do drugs sparingly, the stupid plebs will brand you a coward. If you live for the real truth, the real reality, you will always be attacked on both sides. You will find yourself constantly alone.

Now this next bit might piss some of you off. They also invented the modern family. If you have kids, thats great. The sort of minds on this board need to breed, and I'm sure your children are a wonderful part of your life. But doesn't it piss you off when the church sticks their claws into their brain? Don't you fucking hate it when your job runs your life because although you can go without and wouldn't mind, your kids can't? You don't deserve that. It is another technique to control you, and make you a cog in a machine instead of a person. Personal independence and freedom is truly dead save for a few pockets.

I know mostly everything on the news and assbook is fake propaganda. I know god doesn't exist. I know that social structure isn't really needed and is also a form of control. I will never graduate because I'm already making good money even though I dropped out in 9nth grade. I will never have a wedding because I don't want to lose my mind after I catch chad fucking my wife, or lose my freedom to some girl's offspring who are going to talk shit about me after I'm dead anyway. You're not getting me with any of it. The question is, what do I get out saying "fuck that" to everything society expects from me as a man?

To be honest not a whole lot. I have a relatively stress free life, but a lonely one. It would be nice to have some more friends who don't mind if I get too drunk and talk about bob lazar or operation blue beam, or about how I love Michael Aquino's work but sort of disagreed with the pheonix program. I've had to be happy with what I have. In conclusion I would like to present a small guide to staying together if you made it this far.

>You are going to watch your freinds crash and burn. This lifestyle is crazy, and can be mentally unhealthy if the combination isn't just right. I recently had to stop talking to a childhood sweetheart I linked up with again, she was banging meth and had essentially lost her mind. There was nothing I could do. Every single one hurts, but remember, they aren't the person they were before. And they would want you to live well for them. Stay strong so at least one of the gang makes it long enough to pass on what we have.

>You're going to be lonely, and that's ok. The establishment and shrinks will tell you that you need the group to survive. You don't. You don't even need other people to be happy. You can do it all by yourself "in your mom's basement" if you want. The only reason you think you need other people is because the herd mistakenly believes working together to build a huge eyesore like a mall is an achievement. If you can bring in an extra pair of hands to help, go for it. But you need to be concerned for you.

>Don't trust anyone. Nobody is beyond treachery, don't make yourself available to be hurt, or scammed. If 3 people already know, it isn't a secret anymore. Even your family will betray you if they get paid well enough. Even your wife will poison you for life insurance and run away with chad. 

Remember, don't try to control what you can't understand, just remember to always control your own feelings. There's nothing wrong with you. The left hand path is not for everyone, you're brave. Religion is convenient. Pleb politics makes it easy to pat yourself on the back. You chose reality. You chose to make your own beliefs, and your own goals. You chose yourself, and not the herd. Just remember to stay strong, the truth hurts.....
But it's well worth it.

The substance cannot be abused if the substance sustains the person. Let this resound loudly in the halls of critics who choose to denounce the consumption of psychoactive compounds. I don't need to tell most of this board anything here because this is all stuff you probably already know. Does it deserve to be documented and discussed on this board? I believe yes.

Every other religion has procured a large amount of it's number as a result of broken promises regarding substance abuse treatment. I see this as an abuse of other people's self improvement. Does Satanism have an answer to this? no. Satanists accept that every Satanist handles their issues on a personal level different from every other. These are simply some observations I have made, that when properly noted have kept me from suffering ill effects from my own vices. I respectfully present these ideas as a simple example. There will never be a Satanist rehab facility because helping other people over come something nobody else but them can understand is a pointless endeavor.

The problem constantly presented by the establishment is the elimation of the chemical agressor and not the psychological problem. Before anyone can hope to alter a habit with any victory, they must first win a victory over themselves rather than over a substance. For example, if you drink too much, and embarrass yourself, the only solution is to become the most civil and well controlled drunk you can be, before dare attempting sobriety. How can a conflicted, depressed, and misplaced person hope to stay sober? You know full well your problems did not begin with boose, cigarettes, pills, meth, coke, whatever you began using to make your problems hurt you less on the inside.

The problems have been around long before you got high, and they will still be there to greet you when you come down. Rehab cannot help you. Sobriety cannot help you. Confidence, self-awareness, and knowledge can. You shouldn't ask yourself :"why do I get high?". That's a stupid question with a stupid answer. What you should ask is much more direct. "What can I do about these problems, OTHER than get high?" If you pursue this course of thinking, you may find yourself so occupied you have no time for your addiction anymore. This is however, unlikely to be easy at first. But you should always be your own master, and accept help from nobody. Only you can make yourself master of yourself. If you seek somebody else's authority, that authority will be there to stay.

You must appoint yourself judge, jury, and executioner in you're life. That is the only path to true freedom.

If there's a problem, it's your fault, if there's a victory, you got lucky, make sure and record the environment in which it has happened. I claim little credit for many of my victories, I more claim credit for making possible the environment in which they happened. The random aspect of life should not be ignored. It governs far more than the averge person is aware of. Your victories in life are a cast of lots and effort, nothing more. Understand this, and you WILL be victorious every time.

No cult, no social circle, not even one so well informed as this one, will be any help to a struggling addict. Isolation from people and things associated with the object of addiction is only a small relief, one which is made redundant very quickly. Isolation from the self cannot further the goals of the self, or one's true will. The fact is, mental strength wins mental conflicts. Don't let the god squad take over your life just because you like your drugs a little too much. Everybody I've met that quit anything with success did it alone. The people getting piss tested and praying are just a stone's throw away from ODing on their first relapse. 

Fuck god, your family already hates you, and shrinks don't understand you. YOU can do it.

"Nature" refers to everything we are born with. In other words, Nature is everything we have and can do at the moment we're shipped brand new from the factory. It's all the base mechanisms we need to survive as individuals as well as a species as a whole. On the individual scale there's critical mechanisms which sustain an individual organism's life --, like the ability to breathe. On the species scale, there's things like individual variations from height to temperment.

"Nurture" refers to everything which has been added to or changed within us since birth. It's everything that we've learned and ways we have changed outside the normal pre-programmed life cycle from vibrant infant to elderly corpse. These are things like habits, the language we speak, the effects of acculturation to our native culture, (more or less) all individual differences in personality, and differences in height due to failure to thrive (ex. due to malnutrition). 

A much more simple way to describe Nature / Nurture is to include them within the same system defined within the interdependent roles they play as two integrated parts of the same system: Nature is the structure and basic life functions of an organism, Nuture is what ensures it's survival within it's environment.

Both are required to work together to ensure the continued survival of such an organism. Nature without Nurture is symbolized by the Tarot card The Fool. Like the Fool, Nature knows nothing about it's environment by itself, and also like the Fool, that ignorance will result in a stupid, if mercifily swift, death. Nurture without Nature is like software on a DVD. It's useless without a computer to run on.To use another metaphor: Nature is like the living spaceman inside a spacesuit. Nurture is the spacesuit itself -- it's an adaption which allows the spaceman to live within a cold, airless vaccum by providing what the spaceman needs to live within that environment -- air and warmth. The spacesuit is like the knowledge of a special forces soldier trained to survive in a jungle. His knowledge provides what he needs to survive in the jungle -- food, shelter, how to avoid being eaten by a tiger -- by informing him how to find these neccessities and stay safe within in a jungle.

A Footnote I: As is obvious at this point, the debate about Nature vs. Nurture isn't really useful when the debate is framed in absolutes. There's very little in us that are solely due one or the other. For example, the ability to learn to walk at a certain age is Nature. Actually learning to walk is Nurture. It's the same with language acquisition.
Actually, to be frank, the debate isn't useful whatsoever. Nature vs. Nurture is only really useful as a lens to look at ourselves with in order to identify which parts are hardwired and which can be changed, and how these two parts within the same system are mutally interdependent and influence each other. Knowing this, it's obvious why people in every part of the world learn to speak and move, yet they learn to do so in a way unique to their culture (environment.)

Until then here's some muzak:

From "Reversal Theory: The Dynamics of Emotion, Motivation and Personality"

Chapter 6 : The Experience of Rules

Negativistic and Conformist States
...Another important component of the experience of motivation ... concerns whether one sees what one is trying to do as in accordance with, or contrary to, some rule or set of rules to behave in a certain way. The term “rule” here is to be understood in the most general sense as any pressure to conform.It should be taken to include not only explicit rules or orders, but also conventions, routines, customs, habits, expectations, rituals, and so on.The issue here is whether one wants to be compliant or defiant, docile or rebellious, malleable or stubborn, easy or awkward. Is one following the rules or breaking them, being “good”or being “bad”? Is one doing what one is supposed to do, or not?...

The Power of Negative Thinking
On the face of it, negativism is liable to cause nothing but disruption, destruction, and distress. So where did it come from? Why do human beings appear to be programmed with the capacity to spend periods of time in the negativistic state and to display such behavior? Presumably it must serve some personal and social functions, otherwise it would not have survived the exigencies of natural selection during evolution. ... more

Music Companies are Brainwashing You to Like Bad Pop Songs

The definition of hypnosis is different depending on who you ask, even among skilled hypnotists. The reasons for this is legion, but I think I've found a way to explain hypnosis in a way that anyone can understand.

The main problem with hypnosis is the confusion between the hypnotic process and what is generally thought of as the 'hypnotic state.' 

The so-called hypnotic state is just a state where the hypnotic process can be the most effective. It's like that position martial arts experts contrive to get someone into so they can demonstrate their 'talent' -- any 'off-balance' state will do, but the cliche is to get a volunteer to thrust a knife at them, which not only gets the job done in getting them off balance but the outstretched arm also gives the martial art 'expert' an easy handle to use.

The way this position is similar to the hypnotic state is that anyone can throw anyone once they have their opponent in this convenient off-balance position ( which I'm told never happens in a real fight ). Similarly, the hypnotic state it's easy for hypnotists to do what they do, but it's a state that almost never happens in real life except in very specific circumstances.

The hypnotic state is a deep state of suggestibility in which the critical mind has been shut off. It's very similar to a dreaming state where no matter what happens, no matter how strange, you just go along with it; if you are dreaming that you're at home, walk through a door, and suddenly find yourself in a movie theater, well, that's just normal.

What makes the hypnotic state so useful to hypnotists are three things --

1) the subject is passive

2) the subject's critical mind is shut off

3) the subject's imagination is on overdrive

With a subject in this state all a hypnotist has to do is speak a narrative which the subject can passively follow along with.

All forms of experience which require someone to become passive to it are naturally hypnotic. Most forms of entertainment these days are hypnotic in this way -- movies and television are the most hypnotic for the masses, reading books is the most hypnotic -- you probably won't believe it -- for those that make the best hypnotic subjects.

In the days before mass media, the rhythmic beating of a drum and the swaying of movement worked well. The swaying of dance and the swaying of a boat along the waves are equally as hypnotic.

Believe it or not, a roller coaster is a hypnotic device -- it requires it's riders to become passive to it and go along for the ride. 'Keep your hands in the coaster' and 'you must be this tall to take this ride' part of it's induction method.

So, there's the hypnotic state and the process of hypnosis. With the hypnotic state defined as I've defined it here, the hypnotic process is the process of directing someone's experience, and that's about all it really is.