Check out Foreo at foreo.se/d7mo and get 30% off UFO 3. For the first 50 people, get a 10% additional discount using the code 10SIDEPJ. Thank you FOREO for the sponsorship!
You're wrong about a few things regarding OCPD. Specially about intrusive thoughts. That's incorrect, intrusive thoughts are 100% a symptom. Maybe not for differential diagnosis, but a symptom nonetheless.
The irony of Freud is that his most insightful work by modern standards was the early-career work he ended up retracting because it was ruffling too many feathers. Before he went totally off the deep end, he had some genuine insights that were well ahead of their time, but he doesn't get his name attached to those ideas because he chose to distance himself from them.
I was afraid of the holes in my memory because the things I remember are bad enough. I always thought I had to dig them out and face them. She told me not to, if my mind is protecting me, let it. I am doing so much better now.
The most effective skill a therapist can have is the ability to ask the right questions so the patient can discover the answers that they had all along.
Exactly, even if I know they are right unless they helped me come to a conclusion myself and then helped me understand that conclusion, it’s going to be extremely hard to internalize and apply that conclusion
@@KT-dj4iy I'm no therapist, but I've done a lot of personal development work, and they're correct. Asking the right questions forces you to think more about the problem and solutions. Answers that you discover on your own tend to stick a lot better in your mind than answers that are given to you. That's not to say there isn't any time and place where answers should be given directly, but asking targeted questions can be effective
I have OCPD (with a big dash of OCD) and the best quote I’ve ever heard to explain the difference was something like “people who have OCD understand what they are doing is crazy but can’t stop, while people with OCPD feel it’s crazy for anyone not doing the same way they are and needs to be stopped”
Freud's collaboration with the surgeon Wilhelm Fliess was so bizarre that it warrants an episode maybe on the Shadows show. In a bizarre combination of bromance, pseudo-science, and intense misogyny, they tried to cure depressed and hysterical women with repeated nose surgeries. If at first you don't succeed, break her nose and try again. Any complaining from the patient was blamed on her poor attitude. They scolded one repeat patient for weeks because she complained of pain and obstructed breathing. When the infection became bad enough that surgery was required, Fliess was surprised to find a piece of bandaging gauze left from the previous surgery. He and Freud were not remorseful and continued to blame the patient for all physical and psychological problems. Wild stuff.
I think in many ways Freud is on par with the guy who won the Nobel Prize for lobotomies. He had some good ideas but was also in many ways a massive quack with way too much praise.
@@arthas640 Egas Moniz was not a quack. He was an accomplished neurosurgeon who also invented: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_angiography IMHO it says a lot about medicine and society that he won the nobel prize for the cerebral leukotomy and not that. Cerebral angiography is still performed today, and is extremely important. There was hardly universal praise for him, either--some people essentially called it quackery then. But those people also didn't have any better ideas about WTF to do, and some of them were probably doing other things that we consider ghastly today. If you consider it in its historical context (this was a LONG time ago) and draw a contrast with the practice of psychiatry today, there are MANY psychiatrists who are WAY more deserving of the label of "quack" than he was. If you want to point to a lobotomizing quack, point to Walter Freeman. He crashed around the country doing lobotomies in his "lobotomobile" (I'm not making this up--that's what he called it). He invented the "transorbital lobotomy", which was basically jamming something sharp in through the orbit of the eye, puncturing the bone, and wiggling it around. He literally used the icepick from his bar. He would operate on two patients at once for show. THAT is quackery. Why don't I call the first lobotomy quackery also? Because antipsychotic drugs at high enough doses have a similar effect, and countless people are compelled to take those today--despite nearly a century's worth of experience. Sure, that effect is reversible (though they can produce irreversible effects, such as tardive dyskinesia), but if people are forcibly drugged (many are), what's the difference, really? Again: you have to consider how much more is known now in drawing a comparison. You can't have it both ways. I'm not promoting lobotomies, lol. What I'm saying is that to determine whether someone is a quack, you have to look at their motives and their practices. And if you call Freud a quack--he mostly just spoke to people--then a lot of what actually happens in psychologists's offices today is quackery also. Oh, and FWIW, this is still performed today--rarely, but it is very much a thing: "Bilateral cingulotomy is a form of psychosurgery, introduced in 1948 as an alternative to lobotomy. Today, it is mainly used in the treatment of depression[1] and obsessive-compulsive disorder." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilateral_cingulotomy Clearly, the work of Egas Moniz contributed to that, wouldn't you say? Some people have called for rescinding his Nobel Prize. I suspect that this is part of the reason why that never happened, and I don't think it should happen. Frankly, if anything I think you've got it backwards: it's unfair to Egas Moniz to say he's on par with Freud (though I personally wouldn't characterize Freud this way).
@@amazinggrapes3045 not that surprising. Freud was kind of weird at the best of times, even for the day he was pretty sexist, and he had an extreme ego making it impossible to admit he was wrong. I sometimes think that's why he went into psychology: his theories were impossible to disprove most of the time and since it was such a new science it allowed him to get tons of attention without tons of scrutiny.
To add to Freud's theories about mothers... his mother was closer in age to him than his dad and he was raised by a wet nurse, and thus may not have had the Westermarck Effect (what stops us from being attracted to people we grew up with) kick in. There's evidence to suggest that Freud had a crush on his own mother and assumed this was universal as a result, which is terrible science.
I believe it's called "Assumed similarity bias", which means we assume that watever is normal in us applies to all people. Add to that all of the other cognitive biases he suffered from, and it's almost a miracle that there have been salvafgeable things out of his work.
I've been polygraphed more than 10 times in my life for government clearances. I've never been untruthful, but I've been told I've been deceptive in about about half the tests. It's just difficult to sit there attached to a machine with your job on the line. I call BS.
I’m about to undergo my first polygraph, tomorrow actually, hoping to get a dispatcher position. I’m nervous for this exact reason. Plus I have anxiety disorders already. Woo!
@@midnightmuse9829 Try to relax. The polygraphers have a bit of a complex, thinking they can come at you with the results afterward. It's a game. Don't change your answers afterward and you'll be fine.
I had to take a polygraph test once because another employee took money from our company. The actual test was easy compared to the 4+ hour interview you have to do with the detectives that are giving the test. They asked the most personal questions., and I passed it. I think going through the whole experience is what's most useful to them. Def one of the most stressful days of my life. The guy who stole the money confessed in the pre-test interview.
This. It's not about the machine. Anyone who has actually had this test never wants to take another. It's a lot worse than typical police questioning and that's saying something.
Therapy started to really work for me when I changed my perspective from I need help from someone to I need to help myself, therapy is about learning to be your own therapist
OCD is ego-dystonic, OCPD is ego-syntonic. Ego-syntonic means that it fits the person's sense of self and they embrace it, it is a part of who they are. Ego-dystonic means that it causes them distress and they see it as an affliction that they want to get rid of. All personality disorders are ego-sytonic, that's why they're called personality disorders. The person embraces these characteristics that others dislike. All other psychiatric disorders cause the person distress and the person afflicted wants to be free of it.
This makes sense. I had a roommate who might have had a personality disorder. She was creepily charming when we interviewed her, but she turned out to be completely irrational. She would start screaming if a roommate opened the fridge while she was eating. And she would threaten to have them thrown out. Like the landlady who was desperate to keep tenants is going to throw out long term tenants over nothing. Ridiculous, but her reactions where so extreme that it made you feel like you where in a fight for your life. And her whole life was like that. She used a PO box because she moved so often, had lawsuits going, and mentioned being attacked on a bus like it was an everyday occurrence. Probably someone brushed by her and set her off. It was like she was on the run from her own behavior and didn't know it. I came to the conclusion that her nervous system reacted to annoyance as if she was being physically attacked.
Although I find some bias in some of your historical topics, your psychological topics are the best I have seen. I really appreciate them as a school teacher. All in all, your staff does very good research and you are always worth viewing
Polygraphs are ridiculous. The only thing more ridiculous is that they are still used at all. The biggest reason Polygraphs are unreliable is the fact that it is obvious when you are asked the control questions and when you are asked the "important ones'. How do you think a person will react when asked their eye color or if they are wearing a watch and then they are asked if they stole money from their employer. I'm thinking most people will naturally feel more stress when asked about theft, or whatever. So they will show more stress.
Prefacing that, as with all mental-health issues, these are only 'diagnosable' if they cause 'persistent difficulty' for the person (which is also itself a subjective call, but ya know...) I feel like this video gave a lot of good details, but needed to fill out some screen-time and could maybe be easier to understand in a more distilled contrasting: OCPD has also been called Anankastic personality, i.e. a perfectionist with standards that are WAY too high, both for themselves and others, and so they try to maintain a 'perfect' environment, and they perceive a strong logic connecting the perfect environment with positive outcomes and the avoidance of negative ones (whether or not it proves true). It is often a symptom of C-PTSD (i.e. exposure to repeated, long-term trauma) of children raised in 'zero-tolerance' environments, and Autism Spectrum Disorder often has it comorbid as that is essentially what being an autistic child feels like. OCD is less about maintaining a perfect environment and more about the personal performance of specific rituals which the person feels prevent some negative outcome (whether or not they can name the outcome) but also they're usually aware that they can't provide a connection between the causes and effects that others find logical, and in fact it is often BECAUSE they can't work out what the logical causal connection may be that they feel the need to continue the ritual. It is often (though obviously not always) developed in response to specific trauma events: sometimes media consumed at a young age before it can be properly contextualized, other times domestic or political violence, or natural disasters and accidents, etc.
I have two comments about lie detectors. At best, a lie detector can only tell if a person is agitated but not why. T subject may have had a fight with their significant other. Lie detectors can be beat. If a subject has been studying relaxation techniques, they can keep their physical responses under control especially for key questions.
Interesting thing to add as someone with OCD - The need for control can also lead to totally giving up on something. If you get overwhelmed the it feels better to not do anything at all than it does to do it partially
@@kryptonianguest1903Not necessarily. For most people, it's entirely possible to rewrite memories by repeating the false thing until it becomes true, or at least until it becomes convincing enough that you can believably say you don't know. It all depends how much time you have to prepare, and it can be even more efficient if someone you trust coaches you through it. You most likely have a bunch of memories that aren't real. Either stuff you made up, or things you've read or were told about that you're convinced you've seen/done yourself. Some of them may even be true, the memory just isn't yours (how many childhood events do we "remember" only because we've heard about them from our parents?)
I’ve been trying to get brain surgery for my OCD for about 5 years now. My doctors just repeatedly tell me it’s too invasive. Which I get but being unable to live properly and barely hold down a minimum wage job is also pretty invasive to my life.
Polygraphs are not to tell if you are lying. It is to get a statement to possibly incriminate you of something. If you don’t take one, the police infer guilt. If you answer the question and you don’t pass, such as being the parent of a murdered child and you are emotional, it gives police in their heads probable cause to hound you.
The OCD story immediately reminded me of a case I saw, it was a video I saw I think during psychology class, where a woman had an obsessive compulsion to tap her teeth, at the very least her top two incisors, with the glass or mug she was drinking out of. As a result of this, she had chipped her teeth more than once, so by the time she was interviewed for the video, she had replaced all the cups and glasses in her house with styrofoam cups to prevent her from chipping her teeth again. Edit: Oh boy, Sigmund Freud... to put it mildly, we are/were taught in University that pretty much everything that came from Freud is bullshit now, but we did study him from a history of psychology perspective. Oh, the confirmation bias! That reminds me of a super funny Freud story. From memory, this might not be 100% accurate, but I know the conclusion is that he believed in dream analysis and that dreams were basically wish fulfilment. He had a patient who told him that she had a dream she was spending time with her mother-in-law, so if dreams are wish fulfilment, then obviously she wanted to spend time with her mother in law, right? Wrong! She didn't like spending time with her mother in law (she might have hated her, I don't remember.) So then Freud must be wrong, dreams can't be wish fulfilment then, right? Wrong again! Freud concluded that the woman's real wish was for him to be wrong, so by having a dream that contradicts his theory, thus seemingly proving him wrong, her wish was fulfilled! He's a genius! And by genius I mean batshit! I'm not joking for a second, his conclusion was genuinely that her wish was for him to be wrong, and therefore her wish was fulfilled, proving him right. But he also completely ignores the paradoxical nature of that with his conclusion, but to be fair, what do you take him for? Someone who actually knows what they're talking about? Honestly no idea if he went on to address the paradox, but if you actually knew what you were talking about, then your conclusion probably wouldn't be a paradox, so...
Most people see psychology as an assumption that quickly forgets the last assumption as a method of excuse or inevitability for momentary validation. They’ll know the name but they’ll fall silent when asked to provide anything that the name doesn’t make obvious. Very few people are prepared to face their flaws, the ones diagnosed with the most blatant issues are the ones who are forced to deal with themselves giving them the more advanced answers. The ones never diagnosed see themselves as flawless, the lack of knowledge isn’t aware of its emptiness. It gives them a false sense of confidence in something they’ve had to address. They never know that they never know anything. That’s why you should never run from truth.
Concerning the lie detector, I didn't hear the mention of determining a base line against which to compare the results of the changes of physiological characteristics. They may not be reliable enough in court, but they can be useful in determining patterns of truthfulness and deception. A skillful examiner will use various ways of asking a question, for example, and watch the way the subject responds and tailor follow-up questions to refine the query. This is especially useful when questioning a witness. It can still be a useful tool.
The difficulties with understanding OCD/OCPD are exactly why I've struggled to determine which - if any - of the two I have. Every time it's been brought up by my doctors in relation to my Autism, I've responded that I definitely have both obsessions and compulsions, but can't determine whether they constitute a unique disorder of any kind. It's really not a well discussed or represented topic at the moment.
I use my OCD as a tool. I've setup over 25,000 computers. I've set them up all the same way. Some of the items have changed based on technology upgrades but the "overall process" is still the same.
Late 90s my mother worked at a beer distributor. Well one day it was robbed after closing. No forced had the cops thinking inside job. Every employee (8 people or so) was given a polygraph. My mom was the only person that "passed" the test.
1) My sister confessed to having 🍆 envy once. For context, she was drunk and didn't want to have to walk all the way to the restroom versus "I could just stick it out the window." (We were in her car at a drive in theater) 2) Lie detectors not enough to convict or aquit someone at trial, but enough to do so on a talk show.
Understanding the postive/negative reinforcment is important for when you want to set up your house to encourage things you want and discourage things that you don't want.
That a person *thinks* a detector works is profoundly powerful. Look at people getting their thetans measured. The argument against lie detectors ignores that some people do have these physiological responses when they lie, and more importantly, that all tests to measure trustworthiness or find dishonesty are inconsistent. The point is to use a range of techniques and not rely on any single one. Sometimes lying to the person and saying you already know the truth so they might as well tell you works too, and this is obviously disprovable and has many of the same problems.
I appreciate the fact that a distinction was made between OCD and OCPD. It does make it that much more frustrating that the opposite decision was made with regard to the diagnosis of Autism. Rather than provide additional distinct categories, decision was made to eliminate the few distinctions that were previously available. Explaining that my autistic child isn't quirky and good at math, but rather he is learning to use a sight board as a means of communication, and his ability to engage with me, and his therapists is an amazing accomplishment that required hard work on his part. In my opinion ASD (autism spectrum disorder), encompasses such a broad range of actual manifestations that's it's basically useless, if not misleading.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. So many people's misconceptions re: OCD vs OCPD. I have pretty severe OCD and my coworker clearly has OCPD. Allegedly. In my opinion. But I can't call it out when discussing my condition with people, because of company policy. And I'm sure he's undiagnosed. Allegedly. In my opinion.
I used to work with a guy who had diagnosed himself with OCD. The first time he told me this, I asked him if he wasn't just making excuses for being an asshole.
I've been practising meditation since I was 10yo and have proven many times while connected to full ECG monitors that I can reduce my heart rate and blood pressure at will. It scared the bjezuz out of the cardiology nurses monitoring me when all the alarms went off.
In many cases, the purpose of the polygraph is not to detect lies, but to intimidate the suspect into making a confession. In that sense, it often "works". BTW I had a uncle who worked as a polygraph operator in the 1950s, until he convinced himself that it didn't really work as advertised. He later got a PhD in sociology, specializing in criminology. I remember him saying that "the smart ones don't get caught" (I'm not sure if he was joking or not).
If you ever read through the history of psychology, it's shocking how many of its most well-known theories came from a single person who did a single incredibly flawed study (or in some cases, no study at all). And it hasn't changed to this day. That's why I don't regard it as a science. If you compare it to something like physics, nobody just accepted that quantum mechanics was real. It took decades of experimentation by many different people.
Unfortunately, one still often sees people cite refusal to take a polygraph as evidence of a person’s guilt. I would love to see that bias end, since it’s just evidence of intelligence. Taking a polygraph cannot help you if you become a suspect. Just get a lawyer.
Close with the fmri Simon. It's actually a pupil detection program & camera set up at a university in Northern California. Should be easy to look up -:)
Put a perimenapausal woman on a polygraph test that's been to a good university... an art major and ask them about the color of their hair. The machine might blow up. (That's my self depreciation brand of humor.) Hell I was adopted. I have many legal names. The most valid one is Empress of Antioch. Lol!
Although I think Jung offered more useful insights. I think for both men (Jung & Freud), their insights said as much about their own neuroscies as for the public in general.
Funnily enough, a lot of therapists seem to have the misconception, that they HAVE to talk about your feelings because they shouldn't tell you what to do.
I visited a therapist, twice. Gave him all the breadcrumbs the first visit. He had not bothered reviewing any of that context before the second, and stated clearly that , " it would be immoral" as the material isn't listed in the AMA. So the second meeting starts with gatekeeping theory in applied science. We may have been discussing religion at that point... Then the trite bastard challenged me, overtly stating that, "he can do something I can't." " What? Be subjective? " I ask. " No, I can have an objective opinion of you." That was the moment I lost faith in our societal structure.
It's not that a polygraph can tell if a person is lying, it's that they're worried it can tell when they're lying. It's why there are so many cases of people lying through their teeth and the polygraph registers nothing out of the ordinary. It's not that they don't feel guilt or anything like that, it's just that they know the machine can't tell if they're lying while they're lying. Which really raises the question, why places like the CIA use them, given it's the sort of place filled with people who will know the nuts and bolts of how polygraphs work. And what a surprise, multiple cases of people breezing through their exams only to turn out to be total liars.
A suggestion for you Simon - a channel dedicated to anything and everything having to do with... AI. With more episode topics presenting themselves as it's evolution - or revolution as some predict - come along.
I have a relative who believes her lies as they come out of her mouth. People who don’t know her are sure al of her horrible stories of jealousy relatives ruining her life are real. That is until she twist something they have said or done against them to their loved ones. I barely associate with her anymore, because I can’t do her chaos.
This is just such a reminder of when teacher's are so horrendous, that they punish they whole class thinking that by punishing an entire class from a single person amazed me at age 12 as to why they thought this would work....they were obviously idiotic. Yet teachers...
People have a hard time understanding the meaning of positive vs. negative in psychology when it comes to the positive and negative symptoms of disorders.
NOOOO! Carrot and stick is not about reward/punishment. It's about incentive. the stick is used to dangle the carrot in front of the horse, just out of reach. the horse keeps moving forward to try to get the carrot.
Being an expert at deconstruction facial cues 2:49. This lady is saying that this product only hydrates your skin in one area. So it's defective...or really effective.
I love how academia consistently gives all of these descriptions horrible names, and then turns around and acts likes its the lay person's fault for getting confused about the concept. Why not additive and reductive reinforcement? "Positive and negative reinforcement" really doesn't even make sense in a physical or mathematical context.
As a therapist, it is a guilty pleasure to correct lay people in person when they self diagnose, especially in public places trying to leverage mental health to get their way. Also, someone's diagnosis isn't an excuse to act however they want or demand to be treated a certain way. Act with respect, request with respect, then receive respect from others. Advice is a double edged sword: if it works they become more dependent on you, the therapist; if wrong they could be frustrated with the advice. Avoid the lose-lose of giving advice.
Well, as a therapist you wouldn't be giving a medical diagnosis either would you? A medical diagnosis requires a doctor, which would be a psychiatrist in this case. Maybe things are different where you practice. How is a medical diagnosis rendered where you practice? There's often some wiggle room around psychiatric nurses, who often run the shop (with good reason), but even then, that's going to be signed off by a doctor... Anything else is just an opinion, well meaning, or otherwise.
Or, to paraphrase Pete Davidson, “Being mentally ill is not an excuse to act like a jackass… or so say my girlfriend, my mom, and my therapist.” I’ve dealt with serious mental health issues since puberty, and I had to learn over the years that the effects it has on those around me is MY responsibility. When I don’t take my meds, follow up once a month with my Primary Care Dr, or miss appointments with my therapist, then that is a choice I’m making that affects other people. I know that it is up to me to make the right choices for myself, my family, and my friends. It’s not always an easy road for everyone involved, but I’m grateful to everyone who have helped me over the years. One of the best ways I can demonstrate that gratitude is by doing everything I possibly can to stay healthy for them. I still mess up once in a while, but learning personal responsibility has afforded me hope and a happier life. It takes hard work to manage any serious health condition of either the body or the mind, but it’s worth every effort both for you and everyone you love.
Simon, your mistake is calling things theories, when in fact they are hypotheses. A lot of Frued's work are hypotheses since they can't be proven or disproven. Theories can be repeated and proven, yet never 100% absolute.
Freud's anecdotal evidence would not lead to reproducible results. I understood Freud mostly from Philosophy 1A, where we studied him along with Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. I was majoring in Biology, and I could see a clear distinction between Freud and people like Darwin or Bohr.
The idea of the common understanding of "negative reinforcement" is not merely "punishment" as so briefly described, a substantial percentage of people under the thumb of behavioral reinforcement through negative conditioning don't even realize they are being subjected to unnecessary punishment. Now...correct me if I am wrong, But doesn't an individual need to understand they are being punished for it to be considered punishment?
Or it's just a weird quirk. I have an absurd hatred of prime numbers. That doesn't mean I have OCD. Now what's closer is that I have an irrational belief that if I go get my hair cut I'll start losing all my hair. It's an anxiety response to being diagnosed with lupus. Whether the disease or my medications cause me to lose my hair it has nothing to do with getting my hair cut. And yet I still obsess over it and feel severe anxiety when I think about getting my hair cut.
Lol Freud's penile envy and Oedipus complex are the two craziest theories I learned about in psych class... that man very very sexually curious in his psychological pursuits 😭
OCPD explained this way seems like the "orderliness" subclassification of the "conscientiousness" trait Big 5 Personality Traits, just cranked up to the extreme
Actually, the O in the Big Five Personality traits refers to “Openness,” or how “Open” one is to trying new experiences. One can be adventurous or one can be hesitant to deviate from their routine. That said, I could see how the stress caused by OCPD could influence someone to keep to a strict routine.
I always laugh when people talk about polygraphs as security screening. Pretty much *every* mole that has had major success in long term espionage in nost First World nations since the beginning of the Cold War did so while going through *multiple* polygraph tests without being identified as a liar (and thus a great security risk). Pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the accuracy or utility of polygraphs
Does it though? I mean you are right, but it's not like the goverment only gave them a polygraph, they defeated a LOT of screening procedures and a a lot of security procedures. Sure, it says a polygraph is insufficient but it also seems to suggest most methods have exploitable flaws. It's also worth checking if a polygraph ever sussed out a spy? I genuinely don't know, and doubt it would've been the only tool used, but I am open to the idea that while *we* think it never works, that people who do clearances and investigations use tools that have some levels of success.
Weirdly RUclips knows I commented, but apparently it got removed? That was my comment as well, it's not like a polygraph is the sole determinant: these people defeated multiple security measures. The only question that really matters is have they ever worked. This doesn't make them good or bad, but if we accept they have been useful even if the science is unsound then it makes sense why they get used. Turns out there is no truth serum, no one definitive way to find out someone is lying up to and including them telling you they are.
Psychoanalysis didn’t die with Freud and the dominant theoretical strains of psychoanalysis have long advanced beyond even the neo-Freudians. It’s a layman’s mistake to critique psychoanalysis, as if psychoanalysis is forever trapped in its early 20th century formulation.
![Quando Rondo - Life Goes On [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eIf3fhMXAow/mqdefault.jpg)
Check out Foreo at foreo.se/d7mo and get 30% off UFO 3. For the first 50 people, get a 10% additional discount using the code 10SIDEPJ. Thank you FOREO for the sponsorship!
You're wrong about a few things regarding OCPD. Specially about intrusive thoughts. That's incorrect, intrusive thoughts are 100% a symptom. Maybe not for differential diagnosis, but a symptom nonetheless.
Freud? "WAS THAT THE COKE SNIFFIN LOONEY TOON THAT WANTS TO PORK HIS MOMMY AND KILL HIS DADDY?!" LOL
The irony of Freud is that his most insightful work by modern standards was the early-career work he ended up retracting because it was ruffling too many feathers. Before he went totally off the deep end, he had some genuine insights that were well ahead of their time, but he doesn't get his name attached to those ideas because he chose to distance himself from them.
Elaborate on this please.
5 misconceptions you might have about psychology:
-- this little thing
-- that little thing
-- LITERALLY EVERYTHING FREUD HAD EVEN WRITTEN
...
freud was a poster child for insane modern psychiatrists.
I was afraid of the holes in my memory because the things I remember are bad enough. I always thought I had to dig them out and face them. She told me not to, if my mind is protecting me, let it. I am doing so much better now.
I really appreciate the OCD vs OCPD part. Going on 26 years of living with contamination & disgust OCD.😔
The most effective skill a therapist can have is the ability to ask the right questions so the patient can discover the answers that they had all along.
Exactly, even if I know they are right unless they helped me come to a conclusion myself and then helped me understand that conclusion, it’s going to be extremely hard to internalize and apply that conclusion
Why do you say the most effective skill a therapist can have is the ability to ask the right questions?
@@KT-dj4iy I'm no therapist, but I've done a lot of personal development work, and they're correct. Asking the right questions forces you to think more about the problem and solutions. Answers that you discover on your own tend to stick a lot better in your mind than answers that are given to you.
That's not to say there isn't any time and place where answers should be given directly, but asking targeted questions can be effective
It also means that you're listening and paying attention to what the other people is saying.
Preying on the uneducated and weak
I have OCPD (with a big dash of OCD) and the best quote I’ve ever heard to explain the difference was something like “people who have OCD understand what they are doing is crazy but can’t stop, while people with OCPD feel it’s crazy for anyone not doing the same way they are and needs to be stopped”
Freud's collaboration with the surgeon Wilhelm Fliess was so bizarre that it warrants an episode maybe on the Shadows show. In a bizarre combination of bromance, pseudo-science, and intense misogyny, they tried to cure depressed and hysterical women with repeated nose surgeries. If at first you don't succeed, break her nose and try again. Any complaining from the patient was blamed on her poor attitude. They scolded one repeat patient for weeks because she complained of pain and obstructed breathing. When the infection became bad enough that surgery was required, Fliess was surprised to find a piece of bandaging gauze left from the previous surgery. He and Freud were not remorseful and continued to blame the patient for all physical and psychological problems. Wild stuff.
I think in many ways Freud is on par with the guy who won the Nobel Prize for lobotomies. He had some good ideas but was also in many ways a massive quack with way too much praise.
@@arthas640 Egas Moniz was not a quack. He was an accomplished neurosurgeon who also invented:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_angiography
IMHO it says a lot about medicine and society that he won the nobel prize for the cerebral leukotomy and not that. Cerebral angiography is still performed today, and is extremely important. There was hardly universal praise for him, either--some people essentially called it quackery then. But those people also didn't have any better ideas about WTF to do, and some of them were probably doing other things that we consider ghastly today.
If you consider it in its historical context (this was a LONG time ago) and draw a contrast with the practice of psychiatry today, there are MANY psychiatrists who are WAY more deserving of the label of "quack" than he was. If you want to point to a lobotomizing quack, point to Walter Freeman. He crashed around the country doing lobotomies in his "lobotomobile" (I'm not making this up--that's what he called it). He invented the "transorbital lobotomy", which was basically jamming something sharp in through the orbit of the eye, puncturing the bone, and wiggling it around. He literally used the icepick from his bar. He would operate on two patients at once for show. THAT is quackery.
Why don't I call the first lobotomy quackery also? Because antipsychotic drugs at high enough doses have a similar effect, and countless people are compelled to take those today--despite nearly a century's worth of experience. Sure, that effect is reversible (though they can produce irreversible effects, such as tardive dyskinesia), but if people are forcibly drugged (many are), what's the difference, really? Again: you have to consider how much more is known now in drawing a comparison.
You can't have it both ways. I'm not promoting lobotomies, lol. What I'm saying is that to determine whether someone is a quack, you have to look at their motives and their practices. And if you call Freud a quack--he mostly just spoke to people--then a lot of what actually happens in psychologists's offices today is quackery also.
Oh, and FWIW, this is still performed today--rarely, but it is very much a thing:
"Bilateral cingulotomy is a form of psychosurgery, introduced in 1948 as an alternative to lobotomy. Today, it is mainly used in the treatment of depression[1] and obsessive-compulsive disorder."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilateral_cingulotomy
Clearly, the work of Egas Moniz contributed to that, wouldn't you say? Some people have called for rescinding his Nobel Prize. I suspect that this is part of the reason why that never happened, and I don't think it should happen. Frankly, if anything I think you've got it backwards: it's unfair to Egas Moniz to say he's on par with Freud (though I personally wouldn't characterize Freud this way).
@@arthas640 agreed.
what???
@@amazinggrapes3045 not that surprising. Freud was kind of weird at the best of times, even for the day he was pretty sexist, and he had an extreme ego making it impossible to admit he was wrong. I sometimes think that's why he went into psychology: his theories were impossible to disprove most of the time and since it was such a new science it allowed him to get tons of attention without tons of scrutiny.
Got my BA in psychology in ‘82 and did grad work in the field in the early 90s. Knew all of these, well done presentation.
To add to Freud's theories about mothers... his mother was closer in age to him than his dad and he was raised by a wet nurse, and thus may not have had the Westermarck Effect (what stops us from being attracted to people we grew up with) kick in.
There's evidence to suggest that Freud had a crush on his own mother and assumed this was universal as a result, which is terrible science.
I believe it's called "Assumed similarity bias", which means we assume that watever is normal in us applies to all people. Add to that all of the other cognitive biases he suffered from, and it's almost a miracle that there have been salvafgeable things out of his work.
@@jorgelotr3752It's also called the universal mind fallacy.
@@kryptonianguest1903 The more you know...
@jorgelotr3752 what about the opposite, where I assume everything I think and feel is abnormal and that I'm a freak? 😅
@@QBCPerdition False uniqueness bias with a heavy dose of self-deprecation.
0:50 - Chapter 1 - Negative reinforcement
2:30 - Mid roll ads
3:45 - Back to the video
5:00 - Chapter 2 - Obsessive compulsive disorder
8:30 - Chapter 3 - Advice from your therapist
11:50 - Chapter 4 - Freud's legacy
15:35 - Chapter 5 - Lie detector tests
I've been polygraphed more than 10 times in my life for government clearances. I've never been untruthful, but I've been told I've been deceptive in about about half the tests. It's just difficult to sit there attached to a machine with your job on the line. I call BS.
I’m about to undergo my first polygraph, tomorrow actually, hoping to get a dispatcher position. I’m nervous for this exact reason. Plus I have anxiety disorders already. Woo!
@@midnightmuse9829 Try to relax. The polygraphers have a bit of a complex, thinking they can come at you with the results afterward. It's a game. Don't change your answers afterward and you'll be fine.
Nice to see someone explain OCD better.
I had to take a polygraph test once because another employee took money from our company. The actual test was easy compared to the 4+ hour interview you have to do with the detectives that are giving the test. They asked the most personal questions., and I passed it. I think going through the whole experience is what's most useful to them. Def one of the most stressful days of my life. The guy who stole the money confessed in the pre-test interview.
This. It's not about the machine. Anyone who has actually had this test never wants to take another. It's a lot worse than typical police questioning and that's saying something.
@@curtislindsey1736 what kind of employer requires employees to take a polygraph test!?
@KT-dj4iy police department, for one. And many other state or government level jobs do as well.
@@KT-dj4iy a bank when an employee steals $30,000
The mandatory polygraph is a blessing if you are a psychopath.
I've never heard negative reinforcement explained so clearly
Therapy started to really work for me when I changed my perspective from I need help from someone to I need to help myself, therapy is about learning to be your own therapist
I feel like Freud, himself, actually had an Oedipus Complex and couldn't reconcile it, so it came out in his work.
OCD is ego-dystonic, OCPD is ego-syntonic. Ego-syntonic means that it fits the person's sense of self and they embrace it, it is a part of who they are. Ego-dystonic means that it causes them distress and they see it as an affliction that they want to get rid of.
All personality disorders are ego-sytonic, that's why they're called personality disorders. The person embraces these characteristics that others dislike. All other psychiatric disorders cause the person distress and the person afflicted wants to be free of it.
Is that what a personality disorder is? That's...
That sounds like there could be issues with that
This makes sense. I had a roommate who might have had a personality disorder. She was creepily charming when we interviewed her, but she turned out to be completely irrational. She would start screaming if a roommate opened the fridge while she was eating. And she would threaten to have them thrown out. Like the landlady who was desperate to keep tenants is going to throw out long term tenants over nothing. Ridiculous, but her reactions where so extreme that it made you feel like you where in a fight for your life.
And her whole life was like that. She used a PO box because she moved so often, had lawsuits going, and mentioned being attacked on a bus like it was an everyday occurrence. Probably someone brushed by her and set her off. It was like she was on the run from her own behavior and didn't know it. I came to the conclusion that her nervous system reacted to annoyance as if she was being physically attacked.
@@amazinggrapes3045 yeah that's why they are categorized separate from all other disorders
Although I find some bias in some of your historical topics, your psychological topics are the best I have seen. I really appreciate them as a school teacher. All in all, your staff does very good research and you are always worth viewing
Polygraphs are ridiculous. The only thing more ridiculous is that they are still used at all. The biggest reason Polygraphs are unreliable is the fact that it is obvious when you are asked the control questions and when you are asked the "important ones'. How do you think a person will react when asked their eye color or if they are wearing a watch and then they are asked if they stole money from their employer. I'm thinking most people will naturally feel more stress when asked about theft, or whatever. So they will show more stress.
I love your work Simon, as a career mental health nurse you make so much sense
Prefacing that, as with all mental-health issues, these are only 'diagnosable' if they cause 'persistent difficulty' for the person (which is also itself a subjective call, but ya know...)
I feel like this video gave a lot of good details, but needed to fill out some screen-time and could maybe be easier to understand in a more distilled contrasting:
OCPD has also been called Anankastic personality, i.e. a perfectionist with standards that are WAY too high, both for themselves and others, and so they try to maintain a 'perfect' environment, and they perceive a strong logic connecting the perfect environment with positive outcomes and the avoidance of negative ones (whether or not it proves true).
It is often a symptom of C-PTSD (i.e. exposure to repeated, long-term trauma) of children raised in 'zero-tolerance' environments, and Autism Spectrum Disorder often has it comorbid as that is essentially what being an autistic child feels like.
OCD is less about maintaining a perfect environment and more about the personal performance of specific rituals which the person feels prevent some negative outcome (whether or not they can name the outcome) but also they're usually aware that they can't provide a connection between the causes and effects that others find logical, and in fact it is often BECAUSE they can't work out what the logical causal connection may be that they feel the need to continue the ritual.
It is often (though obviously not always) developed in response to specific trauma events: sometimes media consumed at a young age before it can be properly contextualized, other times domestic or political violence, or natural disasters and accidents, etc.
I have two comments about lie detectors. At best, a lie detector can only tell if a person is agitated but not why. T subject may have had a fight with their significant other. Lie detectors can be beat. If a subject has been studying relaxation techniques, they can keep their physical responses under control especially for key questions.
MONK REFERENCED!
Im so happy. I love that show
thank you for the bit on OCD vs. OCPD. I have OCPD and am always having to correct people that their stereotypes are often incorrect.
8:07 yes! Finally! I hate how ppl cleaning up say ‘oh I’m having an OCD moment’. When they are just cleaning.
The only time I received direct advice from a therapist, was when she suggested I get a dog. It was good advice!
Penn & Teller have an episode showing how to beat a lie detector
Interesting thing to add as someone with OCD - The need for control can also lead to totally giving up on something. If you get overwhelmed the it feels better to not do anything at all than it does to do it partially
Love how you explain the therapeutic process
Even if a polygraph test actually detected lies, if the person believed it was true it wouldn't register as a lie
Well, yeah. The only way to get around that would be sorcery.
@@kryptonianguest1903Not necessarily. For most people, it's entirely possible to rewrite memories by repeating the false thing until it becomes true, or at least until it becomes convincing enough that you can believably say you don't know. It all depends how much time you have to prepare, and it can be even more efficient if someone you trust coaches you through it.
You most likely have a bunch of memories that aren't real. Either stuff you made up, or things you've read or were told about that you're convinced you've seen/done yourself. Some of them may even be true, the memory just isn't yours (how many childhood events do we "remember" only because we've heard about them from our parents?)
Remember, Jerry. It's not a lie, if you believe it.
@@QBCPerdition Only it's a bit tough to convince you are an architect sometimes.
@@mikitz then go for a marine biologist
The best you could say about Sigmund is his coke bill was extensive
I’ve been trying to get brain surgery for my OCD for about 5 years now. My doctors just repeatedly tell me it’s too invasive. Which I get but being unable to live properly and barely hold down a minimum wage job is also pretty invasive to my life.
I used to lick ice-cream, now I just bite into and eat it like a sandwich
I’ve always felt like a psychopath for doing that because no one else does that. Guess I found my soulmate, marry me!
Polygraphs are not to tell if you are lying. It is to get a statement to possibly incriminate you of something. If you don’t take one, the police infer guilt. If you answer the question and you don’t pass, such as being the parent of a murdered child and you are emotional, it gives police in their heads probable cause to hound you.
The OCD story immediately reminded me of a case I saw, it was a video I saw I think during psychology class, where a woman had an obsessive compulsion to tap her teeth, at the very least her top two incisors, with the glass or mug she was drinking out of. As a result of this, she had chipped her teeth more than once, so by the time she was interviewed for the video, she had replaced all the cups and glasses in her house with styrofoam cups to prevent her from chipping her teeth again.
Edit: Oh boy, Sigmund Freud... to put it mildly, we are/were taught in University that pretty much everything that came from Freud is bullshit now, but we did study him from a history of psychology perspective.
Oh, the confirmation bias! That reminds me of a super funny Freud story. From memory, this might not be 100% accurate, but I know the conclusion is that he believed in dream analysis and that dreams were basically wish fulfilment. He had a patient who told him that she had a dream she was spending time with her mother-in-law, so if dreams are wish fulfilment, then obviously she wanted to spend time with her mother in law, right? Wrong! She didn't like spending time with her mother in law (she might have hated her, I don't remember.) So then Freud must be wrong, dreams can't be wish fulfilment then, right? Wrong again! Freud concluded that the woman's real wish was for him to be wrong, so by having a dream that contradicts his theory, thus seemingly proving him wrong, her wish was fulfilled! He's a genius! And by genius I mean batshit! I'm not joking for a second, his conclusion was genuinely that her wish was for him to be wrong, and therefore her wish was fulfilled, proving him right. But he also completely ignores the paradoxical nature of that with his conclusion, but to be fair, what do you take him for? Someone who actually knows what they're talking about? Honestly no idea if he went on to address the paradox, but if you actually knew what you were talking about, then your conclusion probably wouldn't be a paradox, so...
A great deal of Freud's work can be explained by his fondness for the Bolivian Marching Powder.
Most people see psychology as an assumption that quickly forgets the last assumption as a method of excuse or inevitability for momentary validation.
They’ll know the name but they’ll fall silent when asked to provide anything that the name doesn’t make obvious.
Very few people are prepared to face their flaws, the ones diagnosed with the most blatant issues are the ones who are forced to deal with themselves giving them the more advanced answers. The ones never diagnosed see themselves as flawless, the lack of knowledge isn’t aware of its emptiness. It gives them a false sense of confidence in something they’ve had to address.
They never know that they never know anything. That’s why you should never run from truth.
Concerning the lie detector, I didn't hear the mention of determining a base line against which to compare the results of the changes of physiological characteristics. They may not be reliable enough in court, but they can be useful in determining patterns of truthfulness and deception. A skillful examiner will use various ways of asking a question, for example, and watch the way the subject responds and tailor follow-up questions to refine the query. This is especially useful when questioning a witness. It can still be a useful tool.
The difficulties with understanding OCD/OCPD are exactly why I've struggled to determine which - if any - of the two I have.
Every time it's been brought up by my doctors in relation to my Autism, I've responded that I definitely have both obsessions and compulsions, but can't determine whether they constitute a unique disorder of any kind.
It's really not a well discussed or represented topic at the moment.
I use my OCD as a tool. I've setup over 25,000 computers. I've set them up all the same way. Some of the items have changed based on technology upgrades but the "overall process" is still the same.
Late 90s my mother worked at a beer distributor. Well one day it was robbed after closing. No forced had the cops thinking inside job. Every employee (8 people or so) was given a polygraph. My mom was the only person that "passed" the test.
1) My sister confessed to having 🍆 envy once. For context, she was drunk and didn't want to have to walk all the way to the restroom versus "I could just stick it out the window." (We were in her car at a drive in theater)
2) Lie detectors not enough to convict or aquit someone at trial, but enough to do so on a talk show.
Understanding the postive/negative reinforcment is important for when you want to set up your house to encourage things you want and discourage things that you don't want.
As a BCBA, I thoroughly applaud this video!
That a person *thinks* a detector works is profoundly powerful. Look at people getting their thetans measured.
The argument against lie detectors ignores that some people do have these physiological responses when they lie, and more importantly, that all tests to measure trustworthiness or find dishonesty are inconsistent. The point is to use a range of techniques and not rely on any single one. Sometimes lying to the person and saying you already know the truth so they might as well tell you works too, and this is obviously disprovable and has many of the same problems.
I appreciate the fact that a distinction was made between OCD and OCPD. It does make it that much more frustrating that the opposite decision was made with regard to the diagnosis of Autism. Rather than provide additional distinct categories, decision was made to eliminate the few distinctions that were previously available. Explaining that my autistic child isn't quirky and good at math, but rather he is learning to use a sight board as a means of communication, and his ability to engage with me, and his therapists is an amazing accomplishment that required hard work on his part. In my opinion ASD (autism spectrum disorder), encompasses such a broad range of actual manifestations that's it's basically useless, if not misleading.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. So many people's misconceptions re: OCD vs OCPD. I have pretty severe OCD and my coworker clearly has OCPD. Allegedly. In my opinion. But I can't call it out when discussing my condition with people, because of company policy. And I'm sure he's undiagnosed. Allegedly. In my opinion.
I used to work with a guy who had diagnosed himself with OCD. The first time he told me this, I asked him if he wasn't just making excuses for being an asshole.
I've been practising meditation since I was 10yo and have proven many times while connected to full ECG monitors that I can reduce my heart rate and blood pressure at will. It scared the bjezuz out of the cardiology nurses monitoring me when all the alarms went off.
I would argue that detention is a negative punishment because it is the removal of the stimulus of freedom rather than the addition of a stimulus.
Polygraph testing is required for a lot of people on parole. It's absolutely ridiculous.
Re: Chapter 3 … which is why, when asked my advice, I always say “if you want my advice, it’s don’t take anyone’s advice”.🤔😉✌️
In many cases, the purpose of the polygraph is not to detect lies, but to intimidate the suspect into making a confession. In that sense, it often "works".
BTW I had a uncle who worked as a polygraph operator in the 1950s, until he convinced himself that it didn't really work as advertised. He later got a PhD in sociology, specializing in criminology. I remember him saying that "the smart ones don't get caught" (I'm not sure if he was joking or not).
If you ever read through the history of psychology, it's shocking how many of its most well-known theories came from a single person who did a single incredibly flawed study (or in some cases, no study at all). And it hasn't changed to this day.
That's why I don't regard it as a science. If you compare it to something like physics, nobody just accepted that quantum mechanics was real. It took decades of experimentation by many different people.
also as a professional nurse, we never gave advice
we just helped people cope with their own decisions
Your Mental health is just as important as your physical health. One cannot exist without the other.
It's not punishment, it's "conditioning"
Likewise, OCD is egodystonic, and OCPD is egosyntonic.
This maybe the most important video on this channel
Mac -"Mrs Kelly, why are you doing everything in 3s' "
Mrs Kelly - " So Charlie doesn't die" iasip
It's worked so far.
Unfortunately, one still often sees people cite refusal to take a polygraph as evidence of a person’s guilt. I would love to see that bias end, since it’s just evidence of intelligence. Taking a polygraph cannot help you if you become a suspect. Just get a lawyer.
And yet I had to go through an entire section in my high school (5 wks going over just Freud!) and again only 3 in college
Close with the fmri Simon. It's actually a pupil detection program & camera set up at a university in Northern California. Should be easy to look up -:)
I've got my own theories, ever since I was a kid.
I know even more now because of family members with mental health issues.
Put a perimenapausal woman on a polygraph test that's been to a good university... an art major and ask them about the color of their hair. The machine might blow up. (That's my self depreciation brand of humor.) Hell I was adopted. I have many legal names. The most valid one is Empress of Antioch. Lol!
Being cursed with a vivid imagination equals impossible to pass a lie detector test. “Did you stab that woman?” Imagery floods in……”well damn”
Although I think Jung offered more useful insights. I think for both men (Jung & Freud), their insights said as much about their own neuroscies as for the public in general.
Funnily enough, a lot of therapists seem to have the misconception, that they HAVE to talk about your feelings because they shouldn't tell you what to do.
I visited a therapist, twice.
Gave him all the breadcrumbs the first visit.
He had not bothered reviewing any of that context before the second, and stated clearly that , " it would be immoral" as the material isn't listed in the AMA.
So the second meeting starts with gatekeeping theory in applied science. We may have been discussing religion at that point...
Then the trite bastard challenged me, overtly stating that, "he can do something I can't."
" What? Be subjective? " I ask.
" No, I can have an objective opinion of you."
That was the moment I lost faith in our societal structure.
It's not that a polygraph can tell if a person is lying, it's that they're worried it can tell when they're lying. It's why there are so many cases of people lying through their teeth and the polygraph registers nothing out of the ordinary. It's not that they don't feel guilt or anything like that, it's just that they know the machine can't tell if they're lying while they're lying. Which really raises the question, why places like the CIA use them, given it's the sort of place filled with people who will know the nuts and bolts of how polygraphs work. And what a surprise, multiple cases of people breezing through their exams only to turn out to be total liars.
A suggestion for you Simon - a channel dedicated to anything and everything having to do with... AI. With more episode topics presenting themselves as it's evolution - or revolution as some predict - come along.
I’m already spending 25 hours a day with all his channels. Please don’t ask for another channel. I want my life back.
I have a relative who believes her lies as they come out of her mouth. People who don’t know her are sure al of her horrible stories of jealousy relatives ruining her life are real. That is until she twist something they have said or done against them to their loved ones.
I barely associate with her anymore, because I can’t do her chaos.
This is just such a reminder of when teacher's are so horrendous, that they punish they whole class thinking that by punishing an entire class from a single person amazed me at age 12 as to why they thought this would work....they were obviously idiotic. Yet teachers...
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar - Ziggy Frued (maybe)
Dan Ackroyd as Freud to his daughter, “Sometimes a banana is just a banana.”🍌
People have a hard time understanding the meaning of positive vs. negative in psychology when it comes to the positive and negative symptoms of disorders.
Horses are big, got it 👍
Great work as usual 👏
Never anxious when i have to lie, get really anxious when i have to confess the truth 😮 "No daddy, it was big brother who drank all your beer"
The best mental health joke I ever heard is “I don’t have OCD, I have CDO……..they have to be in alphabetical order!!!”
NOOOO! Carrot and stick is not about reward/punishment. It's about incentive. the stick is used to dangle the carrot in front of the horse, just out of reach. the horse keeps moving forward to try to get the carrot.
And a LOT, LOT MORE!
Being an expert at deconstruction facial cues 2:49. This lady is saying that this product only hydrates your skin in one area. So it's defective...or really effective.
I love how academia consistently gives all of these descriptions horrible names, and then turns around and acts likes its the lay person's fault for getting confused about the concept.
Why not additive and reductive reinforcement? "Positive and negative reinforcement" really doesn't even make sense in a physical or mathematical context.
As a therapist, it is a guilty pleasure to correct lay people in person when they self diagnose, especially in public places trying to leverage mental health to get their way. Also, someone's diagnosis isn't an excuse to act however they want or demand to be treated a certain way. Act with respect, request with respect, then receive respect from others. Advice is a double edged sword: if it works they become more dependent on you, the therapist; if wrong they could be frustrated with the advice. Avoid the lose-lose of giving advice.
Well, as a therapist you wouldn't be giving a medical diagnosis either would you? A medical diagnosis requires a doctor, which would be a psychiatrist in this case. Maybe things are different where you practice. How is a medical diagnosis rendered where you practice? There's often some wiggle room around psychiatric nurses, who often run the shop (with good reason), but even then, that's going to be signed off by a doctor... Anything else is just an opinion, well meaning, or otherwise.
Trenton, you seem like a real asshole knowitall.
Or, to paraphrase Pete Davidson, “Being mentally ill is not an excuse to act like a jackass… or so say my girlfriend, my mom, and my therapist.”
I’ve dealt with serious mental health issues since puberty, and I had to learn over the years that the effects it has on those around me is MY responsibility. When I don’t take my meds, follow up once a month with my Primary Care Dr, or miss appointments with my therapist, then that is a choice I’m making that affects other people. I know that it is up to me to make the right choices for myself, my family, and my friends. It’s not always an easy road for everyone involved, but I’m grateful to everyone who have helped me over the years. One of the best ways I can demonstrate that gratitude is by doing everything I possibly can to stay healthy for them. I still mess up once in a while, but learning personal responsibility has afforded me hope and a happier life. It takes hard work to manage any serious health condition of either the body or the mind, but it’s worth every effort both for you and everyone you love.
So this would seem to indicate that I have OCPD, however I still think my colleagues are correct and that I am just an asshole.
Freud got the topic out there for debate, even if totally incorrect, it got people thinking. Also, polygraphs are absolutely trash.
Simon, your mistake is calling things theories, when in fact they are hypotheses. A lot of Frued's work are hypotheses since they can't be proven or disproven. Theories can be repeated and proven, yet never 100% absolute.
Freud's anecdotal evidence would not lead to reproducible results. I understood Freud mostly from Philosophy 1A, where we studied him along with Nietzsche and Kierkegaard. I was majoring in Biology, and I could see a clear distinction between Freud and people like Darwin or Bohr.
The idea of the common understanding of "negative reinforcement" is not merely "punishment" as so briefly described, a substantial percentage of people under the thumb of behavioral reinforcement through negative conditioning don't even realize they are being subjected to unnecessary punishment.
Now...correct me if I am wrong, But doesn't an individual need to understand they are being punished for it to be considered punishment?
OPP? Now that's not so simple!
OCD. The most overused "word" of them all. 99% of people claiming to have this are simply particular about some things.
Or it's just a weird quirk. I have an absurd hatred of prime numbers. That doesn't mean I have OCD. Now what's closer is that I have an irrational belief that if I go get my hair cut I'll start losing all my hair. It's an anxiety response to being diagnosed with lupus. Whether the disease or my medications cause me to lose my hair it has nothing to do with getting my hair cut. And yet I still obsess over it and feel severe anxiety when I think about getting my hair cut.
Lol Freud's penile envy and Oedipus complex are the two craziest theories I learned about in psych class... that man very very sexually curious in his psychological pursuits 😭
OCPD explained this way seems like the "orderliness" subclassification of the "conscientiousness" trait Big 5 Personality Traits, just cranked up to the extreme
Actually, the O in the Big Five Personality traits refers to “Openness,” or how “Open” one is to trying new experiences. One can be adventurous or one can be hesitant to deviate from their routine. That said, I could see how the stress caused by OCPD could influence someone to keep to a strict routine.
@@BlackStarG4 sorry, I was referring to "orderliness" as being a subset of conscientiousness
How am I supposed to be wrong about things I don't even know anything òf?
Personality disorder? Who comes up with these terms, and are these terms still debatable?
Another annoying myth is Dunning-Kruger Effect. It's not proven to exist, yet pop culture likes to reference it.
Anyone else watching this and thinking that Freud just looks an older version of Simon?
I always laugh when people talk about polygraphs as security screening.
Pretty much *every* mole that has had major success in long term espionage in nost First World nations since the beginning of the Cold War did so while going through *multiple* polygraph tests without being identified as a liar (and thus a great security risk).
Pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the accuracy or utility of polygraphs
Does it though? I mean you are right, but it's not like the goverment only gave them a polygraph, they defeated a LOT of screening procedures and a a lot of security procedures.
Sure, it says a polygraph is insufficient but it also seems to suggest most methods have exploitable flaws. It's also worth checking if a polygraph ever sussed out a spy? I genuinely don't know, and doubt it would've been the only tool used, but I am open to the idea that while *we* think it never works, that people who do clearances and investigations use tools that have some levels of success.
That’s a terrible argument. You might as well conclude that locks are useless since every successful thief can crack them.
Weirdly RUclips knows I commented, but apparently it got removed? That was my comment as well, it's not like a polygraph is the sole determinant: these people defeated multiple security measures.
The only question that really matters is have they ever worked. This doesn't make them good or bad, but if we accept they have been useful even if the science is unsound then it makes sense why they get used.
Turns out there is no truth serum, no one definitive way to find out someone is lying up to and including them telling you they are.
Psychoanalysis didn’t die with Freud and the dominant theoretical strains of psychoanalysis have long advanced beyond even the neo-Freudians. It’s a layman’s mistake to critique psychoanalysis, as if psychoanalysis is forever trapped in its early 20th century formulation.
I knew all this and I only took one Psych course in college.
Your channel is a source of endless laughter and fun. Keep inspiring us with your fun and lighthearted content!🌲🐠🏅