Gurney has directed attention to certain devices for estimating the mental state at the moment a post-hypnotic suggestion begins to act. We have seen that the renewed suggestibility is of great importance in deciding whether a fresh hypnosis has been induced or not, and Gurney has made use of this posthypnotic suggestibility for solving the question. The subject, X., is shuffling the cards (post-hypnotically). He is told while he is shuffling that when the clock strikes he will jump up three times. He has finished shuffling and is quite awake. There is nothing to show that he is still in hypnosis; he is not susceptible to suggestion. He does not remember shuffling the cards, and contends that he has not done it; but directly the clock strikes he jumps up three times. From this posthypnotic susceptibility to suggestion we conclude that X. was not in a normal state when he was shuffling the cards. Whether this state was hypnotic, or was another mental state, as Beaunis and Gurney suppose, is another question.

I incline to think it a true hypnosis.

Gurney thinks that in order to properly estimate this posthypnotic state we must take the memory into consideration also. We have seen that subjects in later hypnoses remember what has occurred in earlier ones. If, now, the events of earlier hypnoses should be remembered in the post-hypnotic state, we should consider it a fresh hypnosis. Now, I have often found that there was a complete recollection of the events of earlier hypnoses while the post-hypnotic suggestion was being carried out. This fact also favours the supposition of a fresh hypnosis.

Finally, I may add that there are cases in which physical symptoms are found. The fixed look and blank expression often seen during the carrying out of the post-hypnotic suggestion also justify the assumption of a fresh hypnosis.

It may be concluded from what I have said that posthypnotic suggestions may be carried out in various different states. This, I may add, is the case not only when we compare one subject with another, but when we observe the same subject under different suggestions. The questions upon which it all hinges are - (1) Does the subject remember later on what he has done, and does he remember the events of earlier hypnoses while carrying out the suggestion ? (2) Does he feel after carrying out the suggestion as though he had just been asleep ? (3) Whilst doing what has been suggested is he susceptible either to suggestions to be carried out at once, or to new post-hypnotic suggestions? (4) How does the subject look ? Has he the appearance, the manner, the physical symptoms usual in hypnosis, or not ?

The question becomes even more complicated when we consider the following of Forel's experiments. Forel said to a nurse, "Whenever you say 'Sir' to the assistant-physician, you will scratch your right temple with your right hand without noticing it." The nurse did so, talking clearly and naturally all the time. She did not notice that she was scratching her face.

Here the subject behaves normally, and yet the posthypnotic suggestion is executed during the conversation with complete loss of memory. When a subject performs one act with loss of memory, is this state hypnosis or some other state ? ' I think it should be regarded as a part of normal waking life, for it would be a mistake to conclude a hypnosis from the mere forgetting of one act, without susceptibility to suggestion. Gurney points out that loss of memory alone cannot be taken for proof of an abnormal state, because in normal life we perform actions and see objects without remembering them afterwards. If the action is a purely mechanical one, such as winding a watch, we often remember nothing about it.

I have purposely in the last section only discussed those movements and acts executed post-hypnotically; but all sorts of delusions of the senses, positive and negative, can be induced hypnotically at pleasure. We can cause whole scenes to be gone through; the subject will go to a ball, or partake of an imaginary dinner, etc. The state of the subjects during the realization of a post-hypnotic suggestion may differ considerably, but in my experience it is almost a rule that the induction of a post-hypnotic delusion should induce a fresh hypnosis with susceptibility to suggestion and subsequent loss of memory.

It is possible, besides, to influence subjects in these states in any way. For example, we may make the suggestion thus: "You will see a dog five minutes after you wake; but you will remain awake and not allow anything else to be suggested to you." The subject may in this way be protected from further suggestion; he will then carry out the first suggestion, but for the rest will appear fully awake. X. and Y. are at my house. I hypnotize Y., and say to him, "When you wake, X. will be sitting on this chair; you will remain awake." When he wakes he believes that he sees X. on the chair, and talks to him, etc. I call his attention to the real X. and say, "Which is the real X. ? You see one on the chair and one standing before you." Y. feels the chair and the real X. to find out which is air and which is reality. He finally concludes, "He is on the chair." And yet Y. is not susceptible to suggestion on other points.

But even if we are thus able to influence post-hypnotic acts and sense-delusions by means of particular suggestions, it does not necessarily follow that all the details of a post-hypnotic suggestion depend entirely upon the experimenter's influence. I am much more inclined to think that the state during the carrying out of a post-hypnotic suggestion may vary without any such influence. Undoubtedly much depends upon the purport of the suggestion. The more absurd the suggestion, the more it clashes with the subject's normal way of thinking, the more likely will a fresh hypnosis set in during the carrying out of the post-hypnotic suggestion. For example, X. was in a perfectly normal state when carrying out the post-hypnotic suggestion that he was to rub his hands together occasionally when talking to me later on; but the suggestion that he was to take my purse out of my pocket induced a fresh hypnosis. The nature of the action suggested undoubtedly exerts a great influence in determining the state induced, and to it we must add the character of the subject.