Across cultures and centuries, remarkably similar experiences have been interpreted through very different explanatory lenses. The experience remains consistent; the story around it evolves.
People commonly report:
- A sensed external presence
Often described as watching, approaching, observing, or interacting, even though no external stimulus can be identified at the time. - Temporary paralysis or inability to move or speak
A profound sense of being trapped in the body, frequently accompanied by panic or helplessness. - Intense fear, dread, or awe
The emotional charge is often disproportionate to the situation, suggesting activation of primitive survival systems rather than conscious reasoning. - Pressure on the chest or body
Commonly interpreted historically as oppression by an external force, but now well understood within sleep and stress physiology. - Vivid internal imagery or narrative content
These images or stories often feel imposed rather than imagined, giving them an externalised quality. - A sense of intentionality
The experience feels purposeful — as though something means to communicate, test, judge, or interfere. - Difficulty explaining the experience afterwards
Language often feels insufficient, which increases reliance on symbolic or cultural explanations.
Historical & Cultural Explanatory Frameworks
Before psychology existed, meaning came from religion, folklore, and authority.
Experiences were framed as:
- Incubus and succubus encounters
Medieval explanations for paralysis, fear, and bodily sensation during sleep. - Demonic oppression or possession
Particularly when experiences involved fear, loss of control, or intrusive thoughts. - Angelic or divine visitation
When the emotional tone included awe, revelation, or perceived moral significance. - The “Night Hag” or “Old Hag” phenomenon
Found across multiple cultures, describing a shadowy figure sitting on the chest during sleep. - Trickster or spirit entities
Used to explain unpredictable or destabilising experiences that defied logic.
These explanations were not irrational — they were the best available models for experiences that felt real, external, and uncontrollable.
Hypnosis, Mesmerism & the Observation of Altered States
In the 18th and 19th centuries, mesmerism and early hypnosis brought systematic attention to altered states of consciousness.
Franz Mesmer proposed “animal magnetism” as an explanatory force — a theory later rejected — but the observed effects themselves were real.
What mesmerists and early hypnotists consistently documented was that:
- Attention could be narrowed or absorbed
- Sensory experience could be altered
- Suggestibility increased under expectation and authority
- The body could respond powerfully to belief, imagery, and context
As scientific understanding improved, the language changed.
Mesmerism evolved into hypnosis, reframed not as an external force, but as:
- Altered attention and awareness
- Sensory and perceptual modulation
- Reduced critical filtering
- Heightened responsiveness to internal and external suggestion
Researchers such as James Braid, Jean-Martin Charcot, Pierre Janet, and early Freud shifted the explanation from mysticism to psychology — without denying the legitimacy of the experiences themselves.
Again, the phenomenon remained consistent; the explanatory model matured.
Psychological & Neuroscientific Perspectives
Modern understanding reframes these experiences without dismissing them.
Nervous System & Brain Mechanisms
Key processes involved include:
- Amygdala hyperactivation
The amygdala detects threat before conscious thought, flooding the system with fear and urgency even when no danger is present. - Reduced prefrontal cortex regulation
Under fear, fatigue, trauma, or sleep disruption, rational context and reality-testing weaken. - REM sleep intrusion into waking consciousness
This explains paralysis, vivid imagery, and emotional intensity during sleep-related experiences. - Hypnagogic and hypnopompic states
Transitional states where dream imagery and waking awareness overlap. - Narrative construction after sensation
The brain experiences sensations first, then rapidly constructs meaning to explain them.
The brain prioritises coherence over accuracy when under stress.
Subliminal Processing, Suggestion & Attention
Much of human perception and behaviour is shaped outside conscious awareness.
Subliminal processes refer to how the brain absorbs cues, expectations, and emotional signals without deliberate analysis.
This includes:
- Emotional tone and contextual framing
- Repetition and familiarity
- Authority and expectation shaping interpretation
- Reduced critical filtering under stress or absorption
In altered states — such as hypnosis, fatigue, or high emotional arousal — attention narrows and analytical scrutiny softens. This does not remove agency; it changes how information is processed.
Hypnosis does not impose ideas. It increases responsiveness to internally relevant material already present in the mind.
When combined with strong emotion or uncertainty, subliminal processing can make experiences feel imposed or externally driven — even though they arise from normal cognitive and nervous-system function.
Again: the experience is real — the mechanism is internal.
Pareidolia, Pattern Recognition & Meaning Construction
The human brain is a powerful pattern-recognition system.
Pareidolia describes the tendency to perceive meaningful forms — such as faces, figures, or intentions — in ambiguous or incomplete sensory input.
This process:
- Operates automatically and pre-consciously
- Prioritises detecting agency over verifying accuracy
- Intensifies under fear, fatigue, stress, or altered states
When the nervous system is activated and rational filtering is reduced, the brain may:
- Interpret shadows, sensations, or internal imagery as external presence
- Attribute intention to neutral or internal stimuli
- Construct a coherent narrative to explain unfamiliar sensations
In altered states — including hypnagogic states, sleep paralysis, dissociation, or hypnotic absorption — pareidolia can contribute to experiences that feel externally generated, purposeful, or observed.
Once again: the experience is subjectively real — the interpretation is shaped by neurobiology, expectation, and context.
Carl Jung & Symbolic Meaning
Carl Jung offered a critical bridge between dismissal and literal belief.
He proposed that:
- The unconscious communicates symbolically, not factually
- Dreams and visions express psychological meaning, not external events
- Archetypes recur because they reflect universal human patterns, not shared stories
- Myth is psychologically true, even when not historically true
From this view, an experience can be real in impact without being real in form.
Modern Thinkers on Belief, Meaning & Reality
Several modern thinkers help explain why humans interpret experiences the way they do:
- Robert Anton Wilson
Highlighted how belief systems create “reality tunnels,” shaping perception before conscious reasoning occurs. - Jordan Peterson
Explored myth as survival information — narratives that organise behaviour and meaning rather than literal facts. - Ian McGilchrist
Demonstrated how over-reliance on abstract explanation disconnects us from lived, embodied experience.
Together, they show that humans are meaning-making organisms first, rational analysts second — which is why, in therapy, we focus on lived meaning and perception rather than debating cosmology or belief.
Collective Experiences & Cultural Reinforcement
In sessions, we work with whatever interpretive frame a person holds — religious, spiritual, sceptical, or undecided — while using nervous-system and emotional tools to reduce distress.
Some experiences become shared rather than individual.
This often involves:
- Expectation shaping perception
- Authority validating interpretation
- Group reinforcement stabilising belief
- Emotional contagion amplifying conviction
Events such as the Fatima incident demonstrate how emotionally charged experiences can become culturally real, regardless of literal explanation.
Ritual, Authority & Exorcism
Accounts such as those described by Malachi Martin illustrate how:
- Extreme emotional and dissociative states
- Trauma expressed through belief systems
- Ritual structure and authority
- Nervous system regulation via ceremony
can combine to produce powerful, convincing experiences that feel externally driven.
Again: the experience is real — the explanation is contextual.
Why This Matters Therapeutically
Therapy does not require:
- Deciding what “really happened”
- Debating belief systems
- Accepting or rejecting spiritual explanations
Therapy focuses on:
- Reducing fear
- Regulating the nervous system
- Integrating emotional experience
- Restoring safety and agency
- Allowing meaning without overwhelm
Key Takeaway
- Experience ≠ explanation
- Authority ≠ truth
- Meaning ≠ literal reality
Understanding how the mind generates experience often matters more than what story is attached to it.
Disclaimer
This page is provided for educational and contextual understanding only. It does not seek to define personal belief, replace medical or psychological diagnosis, or determine the literal cause of individual experiences. Therapeutic work focuses on safety, regulation, and meaning rather than explanation or belief validation.