Talk:William Sargant

Multiple
Multiple inaccuracies abound in this article. Either delete it and start again, or edit extensively. Sargant was not a brainwasher, and his book on abreactive therapy had nothing to do with the implantation of false memories. The article must be changed to reflect that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.114.20.121 (talk • contribs)


 * Why didn't you sign your posting? Please provide references that contrast with the article.--AI 02:50, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I recommend reading Darius Rejali's Torture and Democracy for an evaluation of Sargant(Rejali 75-76, 135, etc): I think there's little doubt that Sargant had a strong interest in brainwashing for intelligence work. What Rejali points out, though, is that brainwashing is largely a myth. jackbrown (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Not disputed
Please read "Brainwash: The Secret History of Mind Control" by Dominic Streatfeild Publisher: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd (29 Jun 2006) Language English ISBN: 034092103X

According to this book, Sargant was very definitely a consultant to MI5. Stewart Cambridge 19:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Irmgard, I appreciate contributions to the William Sargant article. However, if you dispute contents, then please follow Accuracy dispute instead of just changing things, deleting content and damaging wikilinks.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Founder and Director of the Department of Psychological Medicine
Clarified where he was expert. --Irmgard 09:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Redundancy is not clarification: Psychological Medicine.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

British Secret Intelligence Service
Moved here as no evidence for it. The fact that his literature has been used by the British Intelligence Service does not make him a consultant. --Irmgard 09:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Restored, please see references.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

U.S. Senate hearing
Put the quote from the senate hearing in correct context. --Irmgard 09:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * And at the same time you damaged the wikilinks. Sneaky vandalism? Reverted.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Quote
Removed - this quote gives a derogatory impression, taken out of context --Irmgard 09:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * "...Jesus Christ might simply have returned to his carpentry following the use of modern [psychiatric] treatments." - William Sargant


 * Restored. Regardless of the impression, there is no wikipedia policy to support your censorship. Please provide the context, that seems to be your only valid argument.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

e-mail and Disptuted
We've had an email to Wikimedia questioning this article. I think it would be worth carefully reviewing the references and sources used, and ensuring that all facts here are correct. the particluar points in question are:


 * were mind control experiments undertaken at at St Thomas'?
 * was he a consultant to the British Intelligence Service?
 * was he at the 1977 Senate hearing, or was it just that his book was referenced?

-- sannse (talk) 18:58, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Aberactive Phlegm

 * It is not my habit to remove external links.
 * In this one however we read :  William Sargant describes a technique (...)called Aberactive Therapy...which stands for Abnormal Reaction Theraphy 


 * The technique described in "Battle for the Mind" is  abreactive treatment , for which several papers are cited:
 * H.A.Palmer (1945):  Abreactive  techniques -Ether
 * Shorvon and Sargant (1947): Exitatory  Abreaction : Special reference to its Mechanism and the use of Ether.
 * Sargant (1950):Indications and Mechanisms of  Abreaction  and its Relation to the Shock Therapies


 * To do justice to William Sargant it would have been better to refer to his remark on The Prevention of Conversion, Brain-washing and Confessions:
 *  The obstacles that the religious or political proselytizer cannot overcome are indifference or detached, controlled and continued amusement on the part of the subject at the efforts made to break him down (...) The safety of the free world seems therefor to lie in a cultivation not only of courage, moral virtue and logic, but of humour: humour which produces the well-balanced state in which emotional excess is laughed at as ugly and wasteful. 
 * in: Battle for the Mind


 * Thus, the link is not merely removed but laughed away as well
 * con gusto,
 * Lunarian (talk) 11:04, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Mindfield is not a legitimate source.
The links (as of 2/27/2008) to mindfield.com are inactive. I have removed them. In addition, the book itself is not in print, not available from any reputable dealer, and not favorably reviewed by any legitimate literary or scholarly authority. The fact that it was written by a prolific novelist and "close freind" of a man purported to have been murdered in a government consipiracy - along with the generally paranoid and hysterical tone of the book's claims - cause serious doubt as to its factual accuracy. The frequency with which it is used in this article gives pause as to the accuracy and legitimacy of this article.

Dominic Streatfeild Brainwash
Has anyone got a copy of Dominic Streatfeild's Brainwash apparently quite well researched and deals in some detail with Sargant.

Streatfeild contributes to James Maw's documentary on Sargant. Might be useful as an authoritative source. The documentary, which is very good, is available here: Freekra] ([[User talk:Freekra|talk) 11:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Mindfield Link is broken
Gordon Thomas, Mindfield (www.http://mindfield.com –about.com)

The link to the Gordon Thomas article is broken so I removed it and placed it here, if someone else wants to track it down. It was the third source given for footnote number 4.Freekra (talk) 11:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on William Sargant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430123130/http://www.dominicstreatfeild.com/2010/11/12/interview-with-mi6-psychiatrist/ to http://www.dominicstreatfeild.com/2010/11/12/interview-with-mi6-psychiatrist/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430123118/http://www.dominicstreatfeild.com/2010/11/12/interview-with-nightingale-nurse-number-1/ to http://www.dominicstreatfeild.com/2010/11/12/interview-with-nightingale-nurse-number-1/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

"Reliance on dogma"
The article's introduction currently explains that Sargant is a controversial figure partly because of "his reliance on dogma rather than clinical evidence[2]", citing the introduction to a textbook he co-authored in 1944. Although I do not have this particular edition on hand to check, I highly doubt it says either of (a) "I rely on dogma" or (b) "I am controversial" and so I suggest deleting this claim or finding a proper source. 111.65.37.26 (talk)

I also think that this passage only shows, by itself, an unjustified negative prejudice against Sargant. At the contrary, in his "Battle for the Mind" he tries to give multiple pieces of evidence, and taken from many fields, supporting his insights on how stress and trauma are used to manipulate people's views, and how dogmatic ideas frequently come from that. This is not "relying on dogma", but quite the contrary. I would suggest cutting this passage, or providing the text supporting this statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annabyby (talk • contribs) 17:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)