I think I see your point, that a mind that’s more analytical than the base state has to be distracted before suggestion can take hold. I’m not sold on the use of the word creative at the other end. It seems like the principal claim is that the individual internalizes the visualization of the hypnotist’s words versus the analyst who considers the words and applies known context first. I’m not sure what I’d call that, but creative isn’t it.

The description sounds an awful lot like the difference between the person who experiences the world through direct input versus through what they think of the input which starts to sound like the MBTI’s sensor/intuitive scale.

Regards.

Thanks for commenting. I see your point, but I guess I may not have explained it in clear enough terms. It is not analytical as in personality or job typing. One might think of scientists as analytic sorts, but in reality, brilliance (as in inventors as well) occurs in abstract and imaginative moments. And you are right about them - creativity and analytical are independent variables, but in the case of hypnosis and how one reacts to a hypnotist, they do tend to be contrast. It is more about how one intakes information than anything else. Does this make sense?

Ellie