Nancy Williams Interview: Oedipal Complex Made Simple.

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 24 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 34

  • @VigiliusHaufniensis
    @VigiliusHaufniensis 10 місяців тому +26

    Gotta love Dr.McWilliams, her book on diagnosis is a masterpiece

  • @michaelwalker6775
    @michaelwalker6775 10 місяців тому +9

    Way to go getting to talk to her and recording her. Her explanations are so profound yet also so simply put and utterly sincere.

  • @itsthelittlethings100
    @itsthelittlethings100 6 місяців тому +3

    Her description by example was divine but having the simple graphics to pin the basics down while she walked through it is wonderful. I hope that you will please release more of your excellent work with her.

  • @bellakrinkle9381
    @bellakrinkle9381 7 місяців тому +6

    Was I the only one who laughed at these children? hmmm, what does this mean? If only all little girls in our world could watch this. After-all, relationships begin with our parents/caretakers as our role models. And everything gets a tiny bit easier with the understanding of how we are drawn to certain partners. What a great intro to the Oedipal Complex, thanks, Nancy.

    • @PsychoFarm
      @PsychoFarm  6 місяців тому +2

      Nancy rules

    • @bellakrinkle9381
      @bellakrinkle9381 6 місяців тому

      @@PsychoFarm I don't watch her often, but when I do, I always learn something.

  • @thomassteffora2210
    @thomassteffora2210 10 місяців тому +3

    Respect. Thanks for this!

  • @JessCyph
    @JessCyph 2 місяці тому

    Thank you for this content! 😊

  • @documax123
    @documax123 Місяць тому

    This is great.

  • @oonaghmolyneux7760
    @oonaghmolyneux7760 6 місяців тому

    How would Oedipal process work if the children’s parents died before age 3-5, as many pre/boomer generations experienced? And in single mom parent families. And what about children raised in institutions (non family environments?). Fraud’s theories seemed very nuclear family based, and assumed demonstrated love/affection between two parents present. But PDA was also rare. Thank you. I love your talks.

  • @jpie78
    @jpie78 10 місяців тому

    great video!!

  • @jesswoodhere
    @jesswoodhere 2 місяці тому

    Brilliant

  • @loubnaezziat6114
    @loubnaezziat6114 5 місяців тому

    Not Jim and Pam 🤣

  • @adampenrose5973
    @adampenrose5973 10 місяців тому +4

    Dude is this you talking to Dr. McWilliams?

  • @Dom-lr8bq
    @Dom-lr8bq 10 місяців тому

    ok big budgettttt

  • @Robis9267
    @Robis9267 10 місяців тому +1

    This is psychopharm exactly how... ?

    • @avelione
      @avelione 10 місяців тому +5

      it shows how people get to a moment when they need pharmaceutics and psychotherapy XD

  • @ClancySayce
    @ClancySayce 7 місяців тому +1

    I have not idea how that hung together as an accurate description.

  • @avelione
    @avelione 10 місяців тому +3

    Maybe nuclear family is a quite bad idea to raise children in, in the first place? 😆 thank you for a very interesting interview.☺

  • @pipp972
    @pipp972 10 місяців тому +3

    It seems to me like a lot of fundamentally unprovable just-so explanations. Actually something I struggle very much with in freudian psych, and to be honest, to a much lesser degree with psychology as a whole. In the interest of expanding my horizons, do you have reading/watching suggestions to explain why, in your opinion, that is not the case? i.e. why I should believe that, of all possible explanations we can come up with that would broadly make sense, this one is correct.

    • @jonz9296
      @jonz9296 9 місяців тому +1

      You should try an ISTDP therapist. This usually will come out in a very unmistakeable manner.

    • @a.d.256
      @a.d.256 7 місяців тому

      I understand the skepticism surrounding this theory; I felt the same when I began my psychiatry training. However, as I delved deeper into the literature (which, regrettably, is mostly in Dutch and thus hard to recommend), I started seeing these patterns in my patients and in children at various developmental stages, which really bolstered my confidence in its validity. If you're interested, Glen Gabbard's books are a good resource, though they can be somewhat dry.

    • @vivvpprof
      @vivvpprof 6 місяців тому +1

      You can't understand any of that if you haven't experienced it firsthand. These are theories that only make sense if you have a point of reference. Psychotherapy is not mathematics.

  • @Koettnylle
    @Koettnylle 3 місяці тому

    A psychoanalyst using anecdotal evidence and unscientific inductive reasoning, per usual

  • @user-bn4nc9fc8r
    @user-bn4nc9fc8r 9 місяців тому +1

    these dr's are weird

    • @Nobody-Nowhere
      @Nobody-Nowhere 6 місяців тому +3

      People are weird, its just that some people cant accept the weird parts of our existence.