This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Science and Academia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance). Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. History of Science Low‑importance This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Medicine: Psychiatry Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

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)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-05-05T12:58:00.000Z","author":"Jackbrown","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jackbrown-2008-05-05T12:58:00.000Z-Multiple","replies":[]}}-->

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)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-08-11T19:54:00.000Z","author":"Stewart Cambridge","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Stewart_Cambridge-2006-08-11T19:54:00.000Z-Not_disputed","replies":[]}}-->

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

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)

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)

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)

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)

Edited the see also - removed not connected, added religious conversion which subject he did work on. --Irmgard 09:09, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The links under See also are related.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reference: http://www.frankolsonproject.org/Statements/Statement-G.Thomas.html

Please conduct more research before you remove content from this article. Contributions would be more welcome than censorship. If you believe information should not be presented, then discuss it here, give us your argument, and provide references.--AI 20:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

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)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-01-21T18:58:00.000Z","author":"Sannse","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Sannse-2006-01-21T18:58:00.000Z-e-mail_and_Disptuted","replies":[]}}-->

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)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2008-02-17T11:04:00.000Z","author":"Lunarian","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Lunarian-2008-02-17T11:04:00.000Z-Aberactive_Phlegm","replies":[]}}-->

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.

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: [1] [[User:Freekra|Freekra] (talk) 11:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-11-30T11:44:00.000Z","author":"Freekra","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Freekra-2009-11-30T11:44:00.000Z-Dominic_Streatfeild_Brainwash","replies":[]}}-->

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)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-11-30T11:55:00.000Z","author":"Freekra","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Freekra-2009-11-30T11:55:00.000Z-Mindfield_Link_is_broken","replies":[]}}-->

I think that it would be of benefit if we could have reproduced here, if possible, some direct quotation from the secondary sources supporting the statements tying Sargant to involvement in the MK-ULTRA programme. Also, if possible, it might be useful to see what primary sources these authors cite in support of these statements.

It is important to make the distinction here between Sargant and Cameron having contact and exchange of ideas (especially regarding depatterning) and Sargant actually being involved in MK-ULTRA at some kind of official level. I think the constant references to MK-ULTRA maybe somewhat misleading. It is absolutely appropriate for Cameron. I think it might be less justified for Sargant.

From my own very limited research it would seem far more likely to me that if Sargant was involved with the security services in such programmes it was likely to be British ones. Moreover, it would seem that while such an association is actually likely to have been made during the start of WWII after his publications on abreaction with service personnel the evidence is mostly circumstantial and it is possible that any documentary evidence that might once have existed has been deliberately destroyed.

St. Thomas: factually this section is mostly uncontroversial. However, some aspects are a bit misleading, I think. Sargant was, at this time, working for the NHS after all, not for any secret service organisation, and that should be emphasised. In fact, in my opinion this section is far more important - and damning of Sargant - than any purported direct link to MK-ULTRA. Freekra (talk) 12:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-11-30T12:11:00.000Z","author":"Freekra","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Freekra-2009-11-30T12:11:00.000Z-Sources","replies":[]}}-->

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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:24, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2017-12-31T09:24:00.000Z","author":"InternetArchiveBot","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-InternetArchiveBot-2017-12-31T09:24:00.000Z-External_links_modified","replies":[]}}-->

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)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20220803171400","author":"Annabyby","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Annabyby-20220803171400-\"Reliance_on_dogma\"","replies":[]}}-->