Object Relations Theory Simplified - Simplest Explanation Ever 

You are so welcome! 🙂👍

@@MisterSimplify😅

You're most welcome! Pls do share and support! 🙂

You're welcome buddy!

You're most welcome! 😊

You're most welcome Simran. Please do check some other content here when you get time, and share it if you found it useful 😊

You're most welcome buddy! 😊

You're welcome buddy! Hope you also check some other tutorials out while you're here! 🙂

Hello. Yes the ideal outcome would be a full recovery. But it's done in stages. And one is sometimes taken to the other extreme before bringing them to a neutral position. In an unrelated example, it would be like reversing into a right spot. you turn your steering one way, then the other way at times, and then finally straighten it. Perhaps not the best example, but you'll get the point. But yes, neither extreme is ideal.

I think this is a concept I already gross but I want to double back and get your validation of my hypothesis to make sure it's lucid. So basically in a neurotic state ur in a constant fluctuation of extreme highs and extreme lows black and white thinking basically. Being in this neurotic state is addicting and when u start circumventing them from this habitual state the next experience is usually depression because ur cutting off or gradually reducing certain stimulation the nervous system has been accustomed to for a long time. But if they stay in there depressive state for long enough over time the mind and body starts to find lower stimulation satisfying and eventually u can get to a more neutral temporary methodical state as ur normal baseline.

You're welcome! 🙂👍

Hello! A person can shuttle between the 2 positions for sure. It's rare to be stuck in both positions. Will be quite a challenge for the therapist. But the human mind is rather mysterious, and one cannot write anything off!

Hi Eric. Apologies for this. Annoyingly enough, RU-vid has disabled the feature wherein one could decide if ads are skipable or non-skipable (and also their placement). I had always just kept the default setting with non-skipable ads turned off and ads at the start and end. Now, it's essentially RU-vid deciding how many ads of what type to play, and where to place them.

Fair enough! Interestingly, the Drive theory of motivation is in my pipeline. I will let you know when it's made, and you can let us know what you think of it! 🙂

@@Dd94949 We mate to bond, but the underlying reason why we have developed to want this and why we feel compelled to do that is reproduction. We didn't evolve / develop a desire for love randomly, for no reason. Everything has it's roots in reproduction and survival.

@@user42344 Wrong. Attachment drives arousal regulation, which drives cognition and behavior. We feel before we think. Emotion is the "tail that wags the dog". It's not survival of the fittest and it never was, it's always been survival of the most nurtured. It is our relationships that allow us (or not) to have an integrated brain (or disintegrated) and a coherent (or incoherent) life narrative. A child cannot "explore the environment" unless he is sure he can return to his secure base for safety/affect regulation. Likewise, a child cannot seek "proximity/care" unless he is sure he can leave/explore (and not threaten the relationship or wellbeing of the parent). These are not conscious processes. Relationships are the water we swim in, and parents are the "architects of a child's brain". If a person can't "feel about thinking and think about feeling", then they are going to have some trouble - and these capacities are learned/internalized in relationship - AND we technically learn to feel before we learn to think. A child's primary concern is for secure attachment before all else - but a child can't attach securely to an insecurely attached parent. The AAI has a highly predictive quality even while the child is still in the womb. Believing in drive theory is like believing the earth is still flat.

​@@user42344 Wrong. Attachment drives arousal regulation, which drives cognition and behavior. We feel before we think. Emotion is the tail that wags the dog. It's not survival of the fittest, and it never was. It's survival of the most nurtured. It is our relationships that allow us (or not) to have and intergrated brain (or disintegrated) and a coherent life narrative (or incoherent). A child cannot "explore the environment" unless he is sure he can return to his secure base for sefety/regulation. Likewise, he cannot seek "proximity/care" unless he is sure he can go out/explore (and not threaten the relationship which he must return to). These are not conscious processes and they have nothing to do with "drives" for survival (or they are secondary). Relationships are the water we swim in, and our parents (and adult partners) are the architects of our brains. If a person can't feel about thinking and think about feeling, then they are going to have some trouble - and those capacities are developed in early attachment relationships - and developmentally, we learn to feel before we learn to think. But, a child can't attach to an insecurely attached adult. The AAI has a highly predictive quality even while the child is still in the womb. Believing in drive theory today is like believing the earth is still flat. "Trauma" and "addiction" are actually just memories (implicit) of our bodily response to an overwhelming situation without the presence of a safe/regulating other to calm the body/protect the brain. The best/only source of soothing for the nervous system is secure attachment - everything else is a "second best" option.

Indeed!!