Transactional Analysis 1: ego states & basic transactions
Uploaded by: TheraminTrees
Video Description:
First in a series on TA, offering some of the metaphors I think can be useful in conceptualising and dealing with interactions. This first video looks at the Parent, Adult and Child states, and basic transactions.
—
Recommended TA texts:
1) Ian Stewart & Vann Joines: 'TA Today: A New Introduction To Transactional Analysis'
2) Thomas A Harris: 'I'm OK, You're OK'
3) Eric Berne: 'Games People Play'
—
Tags for this video: PAC Parent Adult Child transactional analysis ego games stuck script TA complementary crossed
Find more videos in the "Education" category
See more videos uploaded by TheraminTrees
| Conformity | Betting on infinity - a QualiaTrees project | transactional analysis in action |
 |  |  |
| Critical Thinking | Id, Ego, & Superego | Open-mindedness |
 |  |  |
Share This Video:
Comments for this video: Show || Hide
Tell a friend:
NOT universal at all, a Japanese person would disagree with your classification every time. So too a Bantu.
I mean, go to, have at it, amuse yourself, but DON'T tell people you understand human nature with this tool, because it is blatantly subjective in every way.
As everything we do is.
I have never understood the frame of mind that thinks it has answers to things others MUST BE TOLD OF.
Very cult-like behaviour .
—Perhaps no off button, but certainly a volume dial. Where people feel social consequences, people change. Some forums, particularly the internet, where some users indulge in what amounts to childish anonymous phonecalls, don't always encourage change — there are no real consequences to them personally and they don't have to look at their behaviour [cont]
—I think that happens a lot — people resist change. And some people are much more resistant than others. I think boundaries, especially new ones, can take time to establish — people test to see how serious you are about them, and how far you'll take it. I'm prepared to go all the way — as that became clear to people in my life, changes started happening. And ironically we're all much closer now.
But you were not describing them as metaphors, this is you backtracking. You were portraying them as absolutes, and your theory as a way for people to "correct" their "faults".
Do you know that Scientologists also insist that people don't use the term cult?. If we hear quacking, we say duck, not grebe.
And yes, everything people do involves pre-emptive classification. But the name is never the actual thing, because names are entirely subjective.
—.... Huh? At 0:48, I explicitly describe 'ego states' as 'metaphorical groupings of thought, emotion and behaviour'. So it's written explicitly in the video description and in the video itself. So no 'backtracking' — the evidence is clearly there that that was my viewpoint from the start.
—Nope, this series portrays TA theory — it's not mine — as offering some metaphors for conceptualising behaviour that some people might find useful, who feel they have things they want to look at in their life — particularly sticky interactions that they are finding difficult to get out of. There's no 'you must think this way!'. It's actually saying, think/behave how you like — but so will I.
—Did I say the name was the thing? Nope. So that's a red herring. As I said in my last response, this series is about how we deal with the behaviours. I'm not hung up on what you call them. TA uses its own terms. By 'Adult' TA does not mean 'adult' — TA emphasises this by capitalising it, and Parent and Child.
-Modias
I have a theory which fit's this scenario; It's is all bullshit, based off of Freudian notions (which are bunk anyway), an instruction manual on how to live your life is not a book I would want to buy because it's my life to live, if I wanted to live like somebody else I would be somebody else.