01-28-2015, 08:57 AM
(01-27-2015, 02:11 PM)Diana Wrote: I read both books and found them interesting. But I recognize the adherence to a particular perspective. I feel Newton's research is somewhat tainted by his paradigm. I also have a friend who went through their hypnosis (and paid a lot of $ to do so), but was very disappointed in that the hypnosis wasn't very deep or effective. It was more like guided imagery. My friend was very open and not skeptical, so that wasn't why the session was disappointing.
On the other hand, I find Dolores Canon's books to be much more authentic and not adhering to any particular paradigm. She seemed to be very objective and put her subjects into an extremely deep state of hypnosis—the somnambulistic level. There is no one subject or time frame or paradigm that encompasses the results of her research. She didn't seem to be looking for anything in particular as a hypnotist, whereas Newton was looking for the Life Between Lives in his; or rather, once he discovered it, his focus remained there.
As someone who's curious about both Michael Newton's and Dolores Cannon's books but hasn't read any of either, I found this post very helpful -- thank you!