CHAPTER VII:
Criminal Suggestion.--Laboratory Crimes.--Dr. Cocke's
Experiments Showing Criminal Suggestion Is not Possible.--Dr. William
James' Theory.--A Bad Man Cannot Be Made Good, Why Expect to Make a Good
Man Bad?
One of the most interesting phases of hypnotism is that
of post-hypnotic suggestion, to which reference has already been made. It
is true that a suggestion made during the hypnotic condition as to what a
person will do after coming out of the hypnotic sleep may be carried out.
A certain professional hypnotizer claims that once he has hypnotized a
person he can keep that person forever after under his influence by means
of post- hypnotic suggestion. He says to him while in the hypnotic sleep:
"Whenever I look at you, or point at you, you will fall asleep. No one can
hypnotize you but me. Whenever I try to hypnotize you, you will fall
asleep." He says further: "Suggest to a subject while he is sound asleep
that in eight weeks he will mail you a letter with a blank piece of note
paper inside, and during the intervening period you may yourself forget
the occurrence, but in exactly eight weeks he will carry out the
suggestion. Suggestions of this nature are always carried out, especially
when the suggestion is to take effect on some certain day or date named.
Suggest to a subject that in ninety days from a given date he will come to
your house with his coat on inside out, and he will most certainly do so."
The same writer also definitely claims that he can
hypnotize people against their wills. If this were true, what a terrible
power would a shrewd, evil-minded criminal have to compel the execution of
any of his plans! We hope to show that it is not true; but we must admit
that many scientific men have tried experiments which they believe
demonstrate beyond a doubt that criminal use can be and is made of
hypnotic influence. If it were possible to make a person follow out any
line of conduct while actually under hypnotic influence it would be bad
enough; but the use of posthypnotic suggestion opens a yet more
far-reaching and dangerous avenue.
Among the most definite claims of the evil deeds that
may be compelled during hypnotic sleep is that of Dr. Luys, whom we have
already seen as being himself deceived by professional hypnotic subjects.
Says he: "You cannot only oblige this defenseless being, who is incapable
of opposing the slightest resistance, to give from hand to hand anything
you may choose, but you can also make him sign a promise, draw up a bill
of exchange, or any other kind of agreement. You may make him write an
holographic will (which according to French law would be valid), which he
will hand over to you, and of which he will never know the existence. He
is ready to fulfill the minutest legal formalities, and will do so with a
calm, serene and natural manner calculated to deceive the most expert law
officers. These somnambulists will not hesitate either, you may be sure,
to make a denunciation, or to bear false witness; they are, I repeat, the
passive instruments of your will. For instance, take E. She will at my
bidding write out and sign a donation of forty pounds in my favor. In a
criminal point of view the subject under certain suggestions will make
false denunciations, accuse this or that person, and maintain with the
greatest assurance that he has assisted at an imaginary crime. I will
recall to your mind those scenes of fictitious assassination, which have
exhibited before you. I was careful to place in the subject's hands a
piece of paper instead of a dagger or a revolver; but it is evident, that
if they had held veritable murderous instruments, the scene might have had
a tragic ending."
Many experiments along this line have been tried, such
as suggesting the theft of a watch or a spoon, which afterward was
actually carried out.
It may be said at once that "these laboratory crimes"
are in most cases successful: A person who has nothing will give away any
amount if told to do so; but quite different is the case of a wealthy
merchant who really has money to sign away.
Dr. Cocke describes one or two experiments of his own
which have an important bearing on the question of criminal suggestion.
Says he: "A girl who was hypnotized deeply was given a glass of water and
was told that it was a lighted lamp. A broomstick was placed across the
room and she was told that it was a man who intended to injure her. I
suggested to her that she throw the glass of water (she supposing it was a
lighted lamp) at the broomstick, her enemy, and she immediately threw it
with much violence. Then a man was placed across the room, and she was
given instead of a glass of water a lighted lamp. I told her that the lamp
was a glass of water, and that the man across the room was her brother. It
was suggested to her that his clothing was on fire and she was commanded
to extinguish the fire by throwing the lighted lamp at the individual, she
having been told, as was previously mentioned, that it was a glass of
water. Without her knowledge a person was placed behind her for the
purpose of quickly checking her movements, if desired. I then commanded
her to throw the lamp at the man. She raised the lamp, hesitated, wavered,
and then became very hysterical, laughing and crying alternately. This
condition was so profound that she came very near dropping the lamp.
Immediately after she was quieted I made a number of tests to prove that
she was deeply hypnotized. Standing in front of her I gave her a piece of
card-board, telling her that it was a dagger, and commanded her to stab
me. She immediately struck at me with the piece of card-board. I then gave
her an open pocketknife and commanded her to strike at me with it. Again
she raised it to execute my command, again hesitated, and had another
hysterical attack. I have tried similar experiments with thirty or forty
people with similar results. Some of them would have injured themselves
severely, I am convinced, at command, but to what extent I of course
cannot say. That they could have been induced to harm others, or to set
fire to houses, etc., I do not believe. I say this after very careful
reading and a large amount of experimentation."
Dr. Cocke also declares his belief that no person can
be hypnotized against his will by a person who is repugnant to him.
The facts in the case are probably those that might be
indicated by a common-sense consideration of the conditions. If a person
is weak-minded and susceptible to temptation, to theft, for instance, no
doubt a familiar acquaintance of a similar character might hypnotize that
person and cause him to commit the crime to which his moral nature is by
no means averse. If, on the other hand, the personality of the hypnotizer
and the crime itself are repugnant to the hypnotic subject, he will
absolutely refuse to do as he is bidden, even while in the deepest
hypnotic sleep. On this point nearly all authorities agree.
Again, there is absolutely no well authenticated case
of crime committed by a person under hypnotic influence. There have been
several cases reported, and one woman in Paris who aided in a murder was
released on her plea of irresponsibility because she had been hypnotized.
In none of these cases, however, was there any really satisfactory
evidence that hypnotism existed. In all the cases reported there seemed to
be no doubt of the weak character and predisposition to crime. In another
class of cases, namely those of criminal assault upon girls and women, the
only evidence ever adduced that the injured person was hypnotized was the
statement of that person, which cannot really be called evidence at all.
The fact is, a weak character can be tempted and
brought under virtual control much more easily by ordinary means than by
hypnotism. The man who "overpersuades" a business man to endorse a note
uses no hypnotic influence. He is merely making a clever play upon the
man's vanity, egotism, or good nature.
A profound study of the hypnotic state, such as has
been made by Prof. William James, of Harvard College, the great authority
on psychical phenomena and president of the Psychic Research Society,
leads to the conviction that in the hypnotic sleep the will is only in
abeyance, as it is in natural slumber or in sleepwalking, and any unusual
or especially exciting occurrence, especially anything that runs against
the grain of the nature, reawakens that will, and it soon becomes as
active as ever. This is ten times more true in the matter of post-
hypnotic suggestion, which is very much weaker than suggestion that takes
effect during the actual hypnotic sleep. We shall see, furthermore, that
while acting under a delusion at the suggestion of the operator, the
patient is really conscious all the time of the real facts in the
case--indeed, much more keenly so, oftentimes, than the operator himself.
For instance, if a line is drawn on a sheet of paper and the subject is
told there is no line, he will maintain there is no line; but he has to
see it in order to ignore it. Moreover, persons trained to obey,
instinctively do obey even in their waking state. It requires a special
faculty to resist obedience, even during our ordinary waking condition.
Says a recent writer: "It is certain that we are naturally inclined to
obey, conflicts and resistance are the characteristics of some rare
individuals; but between admitting this and saying that we are doomed to
obey--even the least of us--lies a gulf." The same writer says further:
"Hypnotic suggestion is an order given for a few seconds, at most a few
minutes, to an individual in a state of induced sleep. The suggestion may
be repeated; but it is absolutely powerless to transform a criminal into
an honest man, or vice versa." Here is an excellent argument. If it is
possible to make criminals it should be quite as easy to make honest men.
It is true that the weak are sometimes helped for good; but there is no
case on record in which a person who really wished to be bad was ever made
good; and the history of hypnotism is full of attempts in that direction.
A good illustration is an experiment tried by Colonel de Rochas:
"An excellent subject * * * had been left alone for a
few minutes in an apartment, and had stolen a valuable article. After he
had left, the theft was discovered. A few days after it was suggested to
the subject, while asleep, that he should restore the stolen object; the
command was energetically and imperatively reiterated, but in vain. The
theft had been committed by the subject, who had sold the article to an
old curiosity dealer, as it was eventually found on information received
from a third party. Yet this subject would execute all the imaginary
crimes he was ordered."
As to the value of the so-called "laboratory crimes,"
the statement of Dr. Courmelles is of interest: "I have heard a subject
say," he states, "If I were ordered to throw myself out of the window I
should do it, so certain am I either that there would be somebody under
the window to catch me or that I should be stopped in time. The
experimentalist's own interests and the consequences of such an act are a
sure guarantee." |
