Nancy Williams Interview: Oedipal Complex Made Simple.

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 37

  • @VigiliusHaufniensis
    @VigiliusHaufniensis 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +29

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

  • @michaelwalker6775
    @michaelwalker6775 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +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 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    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.

  • @thomassteffora2210
    @thomassteffora2210 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Respect. Thanks for this!

  • @bellakrinkle9381
    @bellakrinkle9381 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +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  8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Nancy rules

    • @bellakrinkle9381
      @bellakrinkle9381 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

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

  • @oonaghmolyneux7760
    @oonaghmolyneux7760 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    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.

  • @JessCyph
    @JessCyph 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thank you for this content! 😊

  • @jpie78
    @jpie78 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    great video!!

  • @documax123
    @documax123 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is great.

  • @jesswoodhere
    @jesswoodhere 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Brilliant

    • @PsychoFarm
      @PsychoFarm  3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you!

  • @loubnaezziat6114
    @loubnaezziat6114 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Not Jim and Pam 🤣

  • @adampenrose5973
    @adampenrose5973 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Dude is this you talking to Dr. McWilliams?

  • @Robis9267
    @Robis9267 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    This is psychopharm exactly how... ?

    • @avelione
      @avelione 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

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

  • @ClancySayce
    @ClancySayce 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

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

  • @Dom-lr8bq
    @Dom-lr8bq 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    ok big budgettttt

  • @avelione
    @avelione 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

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

    • @Eric-tj3tg
      @Eric-tj3tg หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      OSHO, the now deceased Mystic, has blamed the nuclear family for much that goes wrong. In his opinion, and it's hard to disagree, a child grows up with many models, and "relatives" in a community, which gives him/her and parents much in the way of support. He seems right on this issue, imo.

    • @matthewpetto8942
      @matthewpetto8942 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@Eric-tj3tg OSHO is making a larger observation along the lines of "it takes a village" not speaking out against the nuclear family.

    • @Eric-tj3tg
      @Eric-tj3tg หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@matthewpetto8942 I agree that he was speaking of "it takes a village", but in his talk, which I watched in whole, he did in fact blame the nuclear family, specifically, as causal in many of the problems which ensue. Ever since OSHO International's monetization, these talks are harder to watch, but if you search, you may find.

  • @pipp972
    @pipp972 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +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 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

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

    • @a.d.256
      @a.d.256 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      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 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +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.

  • @user-bn4nc9fc8r
    @user-bn4nc9fc8r 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    these dr's are weird

    • @Nobody-Nowhere
      @Nobody-Nowhere 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

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

  • @Koettnylle
    @Koettnylle 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

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