When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, "No." Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
Why does the part that replies not answer, "Yes"?
Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist's suggestion that they are deaf?
Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?
P:被催眠自己是聋子的人被问及自己能不能听见,回答说“不能”(这里的矛盾:如果不能听见,为什么还能听清楚问题?说明这部分是可以听清楚的) C:因为聋的部分和回答的部分是分开的。 Flaw:如果是分开的,回答的这部分应该是不聋的,应该要回答Yes才对。说明回答的部分同事也考虑了自己聋的情况,两者没有分开。
结论:认为听力部分和回答部分分开/没有联系
削弱➡答案得是表示二者没有分开
A. 没有说YES,回答部分知道自己听不见,听力and回答 两个部分有联系,所以削弱了
果因
对于已经发生的事情就是事实了 不能攻击事实