All right, good morning. We'll begin with a word of prayer. If we can have anyone volunteer to pray for us, we can begin with today's session. So if we could have anyone person, please unmute and pray for us so that we can begin with prayer. Heavenly Father, we want to thank you for this morning. We come together before you this time of learning. We submit this into mighty hands. We pray to God that you would bless us and help us to understand your word in a better way.  In Jesus name we pray. Amen. Amen. Thank you. All right, so we have covered four chapters of Ephesians. So today we will do the last two chapters of Ephesians. So last chapter, chapter four, Paul gets into the practical details of our Christian walk. He spent the first two chapters talking about the riches that we have in Christ. He talks about the inheritance that we have, the status that we occupy in the first two chapters. Then last week we saw, he talks more about how we can access the inheritance which we have. And so as he's talking about that in the last portion of chapter four, he started talking about how we need to have certain attitudes which will enable us to gain our inheritance and enjoy our riches. So in the last portion of chapter four, he begins to talk about how we must put off the old self and put on the new attitude. And so we saw how that old self which we are supposed to put off is referring to the unrenewed mind, the old thought patterns that we have, the old worldview which we are still holding on to. So if we put off those things and instead become renewed in our attitude, in our thinking, then we would be able to access all the riches which are rightfully ours. So we saw that. So in chapter five, he continues with the same practical instructions on the kind of attitude we need to have to be able to gain access to all the riches which are ours. In chapter four, we talked a little bit about how believers should not lie to each other. When they are angry, then what is the correct way to handle the anger. We looked at how it is important to work hard and earn rather than stealing and cheating. So now in chapter five, he's continuing with these practical instructions of the way we are to live. So here in chapter five, if we could have someone begin with the verses one to five. Let's see what he has to say to us in verses one to five of chapter five is someone could read out for us please. Yeah, if you could have your Bibles with you even as we are covering this book of Ephesians. So if someone could read out for us Ephesians chapter five verses one to five please. Therefore be imitators of God as their children and walk in love as Christ also has loved us and given himself for us and offering him a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling aroma. But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not be even named among you as is fitting for the saints. Neither filthiness nor foolish talking nor cause justing which are not fitting but rather of giving thanks. For this you know that no fornicator unclean person nor covetous man who is an idolator has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Yes, thank you. So here we see that we are being asked to walk in the way of love. Just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us. So all these things that we are supposed to be doing these instructions which he's giving to us. They should be followed with an attitude of love and what kind of an attitude of love. It talks about how Christ he loved us by giving himself up for us. So he was willing to make sacrifices on our behalf. So even as we follow these instructions which are now going to be given all of them must be practiced with the same attitude of love. Where we are willing to sacrifice and give up things so that we can practice these things in a compassionate, merciful manner with grace and with love. So it says here that Christ when he was loving us he gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and a sacrifice to God. So the sacrifices that he made in serving us and serving the disciples in sacrificing his life for the church. All of these things that he did were like a fragrant offering to the Lord. So when we are walking in love, we too must walk in a sacrificial manner which will be like a fragrant offering to the Lord. So he goes on to say in verses 3 and 4 and 5, let there not even be a hint of sexual immorality or any kind of impurity or greed. And he goes on to explain in verse 5, immorality, impurity, greed, these things are equal to idolatry. So they are that serious in God's eyes. So we may never go and bow down before an idol, but if we are indulging in sexual immorality, if we are greedy for the wealth and the material things of the world, if those are our attitudes, it says that those things would be equal to idol worship. So we are called to live in a sacrificial manner, not even allowing a hint of these things to touch us. There's a lot of noise over here. Sorry, I hope too much of that noise did not come into your sound systems. So this sacrificial attitude where we keep ourselves so much away from greed and the things which the world chases and the immorality that the world indulges in, it will all involve sacrifice, it will all involve having to maybe give up mingling with friends who indulge in such things. It will mean having to keep our distance where people will consider us as being different and so they will not be as friendly towards us as they are towards others. So keeping ourselves so carefully that there isn't even a hint of immorality or greed, that will involve sacrifice. But when we take steps to make those sacrifices, then it will be like a fragrant offering to the Lord. That sacrifice that we are making will be a fragrant offering to the Lord. So it is with this attitude that we are supposed to get into the next few verses. So if we were to look at maybe verse 21 onwards, up to verse 26, if somebody could read out for us, verses 21 to 26 please. We talk to Ma. Efficiency chapter 5 verses 21 to 26 please. Submitting to one another in the fear of God, wives submit your own husbands as to the Lord, for the husband is the head of the wife as also Christ is the head of the church and he is the savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as the Christ also loved the church and gave himself for her, that he might sanctify and clean her with the washing of water by the Word. Amen. So this submission which is being talked about over here would also involve walking in the way of love. In the same way Christ made sacrifices and his sacrifices were a fragrant offering to the Lord. When married couples live in submission to one another like it says in verse 21, when they do that out of reverence for Christ, the sacrifice that they are making will be a fragrant offering to the Lord. So in verse 21, it says submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. It may not be easy to always submit to one another. It may not be easy to always watch out for one another's interests, but the married couple would do that out of reverence for Christ to honour him, to please him, and so whatever they do will be a fragrant offering to the Lord. Now, if you were to notice in verses 22, 23, 24, we see that even though verse 21 says submit to one another, in these verses 22, 23, 24, it's talking about the wife submitting. There's no mention made over here about the husband submitting. So why does it say in verse 21 submit to one another and then go on to say in verses 22, 23, 24, that it's the wife who should submit to the husband. So we see that the wife chooses to submit because the husband has been placed as the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. However, the husband also submits in the sense that he is supposed to love his wife in the same way that Christ loved the church. How did Christ love the church? He gave himself up for her and he served her. So in that sense, even husbands would be submitting to the wife in the sense that they would be serving the wife. They would be building her up. They are meant to look after her, cherish her in the same way that Christ has cherished the church and given himself up for her. So in that sense, both of them are submitting to one another and both of them are bringing glory to the name of Christ by doing that. So if we were to look at Mark chapter 10 verse 45, it talks about what was Christ's approach. It says in Mark 10, 45 it says, for even the son of man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many. So that would be the attitude of service that the couple is asked to take up. So we see in verse 23, it says the husband is the head of the wife in the same way that Christ is the head of the church. So Christ being the head of the church in his position of leadership, he chooses to serve the church. So he does not use his position of authority to only get served but he uses his position of authority to actually serve. In the same way, the husband is very clearly the head of the home and the head of the wife. It's very clearly established in scripture that the husband would definitely be the head of the home and the head of the wife but just like Christ, he would not use his position of authority to just be served but he would also use his position to serve his wife and the rest of the family. So in that way, he would be walking in the way of love just as Christ did, just as the son of man did not come to be served but to serve but to give his life as an answer in that same manner. The head of the home would also choose to give his life to benefit the family members. So therefore it says in verse 26 and 27. It talks about how Christ gave himself up for the church and it says in verse 26, Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her foley, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word and to present her to himself as a radiant church. So Christ in his role of giving himself, sacrificing himself for the church, what he does is he builds up the church, he washes it with the water through the word. I know the word over here is being compared to cleansing water and so Christ as he is serving the church, he does it in a way that the church is built up, the church is edified and so in verse 28 it says, in the same way husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies, he who loves his wife loves himself. So the husband is meant to build up and edify the wife. Whatever he says, whatever he does, it should lead to her edification. It should lead to her growing benefiting. Now this does not mean that the husband would lecture the wife and say, oh you know you need to improve in this area and you need to be more godly in that area. So it's not just speech, it is not just giving off advice because that generally does not work. It's rather just as Christ showed in action how to be a true follower of the father in the same way the husband rather than lecturing would show by example how to serve and how to lead in a godly manner and by presenting those examples he would edify the wife and build her up. So there's a close parallel being drawn over here between Christ and his relationship with the church and the husband's relationship with the wife. So even as Christ always places the church first, even as Christ always serves the church and is always interested in edifying the church, the husband also is called upon over here to place the wife's interests first and to conduct himself in a way which will lead to her building up and lead to her edification. Now what if the wife is not really someone who is cooperating, who is submitting, what if she is the more rebellious type or you know she's very hostile towards the husband, then would the husband still be expected to serve the wife? What would Christ's attitude be? All the believers in the church are not automatically mature godly persons and yet we see Christ being very patient with the church rather than just using his authority to maybe punish the believers, rather we see Christ very gently continuing to serve the church, continuing to speak to her and edify her in a gentle manner. So the husband also would be expected to do that. So even if the wife is not submitting, even if she is not being cooperative, the husband would have to continue imitating Christ. Why? Because in verse 21 it says that the husband and wife are meant to submit to each other out of reverence for Christ. So out of reverence for Christ, the husband continues to be gentle towards the wife. He continues to conduct himself in a way which will maybe build her up, edify her. So he continues to do those things because he chooses to honour Christ. So he does it for Christ's sake and Christ who is seeing his attitude will cater to that home, will take care of the needs of that home because the wife is not cooperating, she is not submitting, she is creating problems in the home. Now it becomes the responsibility of Christ himself to bless that home and help the members of that home because the husband is being very, very careful about honouring and revering Christ even in this difficult situation that he is placed in. I remember reading a couple of books which talked about this aspect. One was the story of a person who married a very difficult person and she never really respected him, in fact kind of looked down upon him because he was not earning very well and so she was not really a good wife. But then she comes under some kind of illness and she in fact becomes invalid which means now she is restricted to the bed and now he has to literally look after her and serve her and he talks about how God teaches him that this is an act of service that he is doing unto the Lord where he begins to serve her even though she had not respected him when she was well now he treats her with respect and he looks after her and he provides for her and he does it as a honourable sacrifice unto the Lord and he talks about how that really built up their marriage how it made a great difference in their relationship because he chose to place God first and honour him in spite of all that was going on in the same way what if the husband is not a Christ like husband what if he is a very domineering selfish maybe even a very cruel person then in such cases would the wife still be expected to submit yes because in verse 21 it says that the couple should submit to one another out of reverence for Christ so she chooses to continue submitting to this very domineering husband because she honours the Lord and this is her way of showing respect to the Lord but continuing to submit to this person of course maybe if he were to ask her to do something that goes against Biblical principles then of course she has every right to refuse I mean if he were to say you know participate in idol worship or if he were to say you know let's not declare our taxes honestly or something like that which goes against Biblical principles she would obviously take a stand and say no I must honour the Lord but apart from that she would choose to continuing submitting to the husband because when she does that then the Lord will build up that home because she is honouring the Lord the Lord now it's the Lord's responsibility to bless that home and take care of it so the husband and wife choose to walk in the way of love you know that's the instruction that is given in the same manner when we move into chapter 6 the children and the parents are also asked to walk in the way of love so it says children obey your parents in the Lord and it says honour your father and mother so the children are asked to obey and honour and they obey with an attitude of love Christ like love they're supposed to honour with a Christ like love they're just simply obeying because you have to and there is no other choice in a crunching manner that would not be the way of love which Christ has set an example because it says right in the beginning of chapter 5 you know be imitators of Christ follow the example that has been set by Christ and walk in the way of love so the obedience which is being given to the parents must be done with the right attitude with an attitude of love and in the same way the parents over here are instructed in verse 4 it says fathers do not exasperate your children instead bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord so the correction which the parents bring would have to be done with the attitude of love in the same way Christ corrects us, disciplines us but does it with love you know because he says in Matthew chapter 11 he says I am a teacher who is humble and gentle in spirit so he never treats us too harshly beyond what we can bear and so in the same way the parents who are disciplining their children would have to train and discipline in a way where there is no way they don't create bitterness or resentment in the hearts of the children so instruction is being given to couples instruction is being given to parents and children and then we move into verse 5 now we are in chapter 6 so if you move into verse 5 here instructions are being given to slaves and also the masters if we could have someone read out for us in chapter 6 verses 5 to 9 please chapter 6 verses 5 to 9 born servants be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh fear and trembling in sincerity of heart as to Christ not with eye service as men please us but as born servants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart good will doing service as to the Lord and not to men knowing that whatever good anyone does he will receive the same from the Lord whether he is a slave or free and you masters do the same things to them giving up threatening knowing that your own masters also is in heaven and there is no partiality with him yes so now these are instructions being given to employers and employees of course here it's talking about actual slaves who would have been purchased by the master and so the master has invested in them he has spent a lot of money to purchase them and now these slaves must be must serve their masters sincerely of course now today we do not have slavery as such even though sometimes in some offices people may feel like as if they are being treated like slaves but yeah we don't have slavery as such anymore but the things which are taught over here can very easily apply to even today's employees look at the instructions that are given how is a Christian employee meant to serve he would have to serve his boss his manager the people lower above him the superiors obviously to serve all of these people the words that are used in verse 5 he is supposed to serve with respect with fear and with sincerity of heart we see that lacking in many of our secular offices people have no respect for their superiors in fact the first chance they get they stab them in the back but a Christian employee is supposed to treat his superiors with respect I mean in fact he would in fact he is supposed to treat even his subordinates with respect and his colleagues with respect so this attitude of respect becomes important for a Christian employee we cannot just smile in front of the person and then back stab them behind their back that would not be the way of love that would not be imitating Christ so employees are asked to show respect to the people that are under home they are working it also mentions the word fear and of course over here it's talking about a godly positive fear it's not talking about a negative fear so here the godly fear that is being referred to would be more in the sense of accountability so the employee works with the awareness that I am accountable to my superiors for the kind of work that I am putting in rather than trying to cut corners rather than trying to avoid responsibility the Christian employees decides I am going to hold myself accountable to my superiors I am going to work in a way which they would be pleased with so whether or not they ask for an account this person because he has his eyes on the Lord he chooses to work in a very accountable manner and of course it says since with sincerity of heart so the reason that the employee does this is because it says in verse 6 he is doing it as though he is doing the will of God from his heart so this employee is not just working to win the favor of the boss when the boss is watching but he is doing his work as though he is literally doing the will of God so with that attitude he serves wholeheartedly that is why verse 7 says serve wholeheartedly as if you were serving the Lord not people and when an employee works in this manner whether or not the employer whether or not the boss appreciates his efforts whether or not that boss is just person or a fair person the reward will come from the Lord so whether or not the boss rewards the employee or not the Lord who is watching in his own way in his perfect timing he will reward the employee so these are three things that we need to keep in mind couples they walk in the way of love submit to each other and serve one another parents and children the children obey in a loving manner the parents discipline in a loving manner and coming over here to the third instruction for employees the employees serve wholeheartedly knowing that whether or not the boss appreciates what they are doing the Lord will reward because it says in verse 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do whether they are slave or free so whether you are an employee who is treated with respect and you have freedom in your office or whether you are treated like a slave in your office the Lord who is watching he will reward and so the final instruction is given to the masters and the masters are told that they too must walk in the way of love and so they must not threaten their slaves or in our case they must not threaten their employees in the sense they must not do anything that would harm the interest of their employees rather they must see to it that they benefit their employees and rightfully pay them for their services and treat them with respect so why must the bosses and the managers and the superiors be careful in the way they treat their employees because it says over here that the Lord is the master of these managers and these bosses and he does not show any favoritism you know because a worldly person may favor with the rich they may favor those who are in authority but God does not care whether you are the boss or whether you are the employee God does not have favorits so if the boss is being unfair then the Lord will definitely take the side of the employee so the manager or the boss needs to be careful they need to you know a Christian manager a Christian boss needs to be careful and make sure that they are not harming the employees interests in any way because their heavenly master who is does not you know feel any favoritism towards the rich or he does not feel any favoritism towards those in authority he will take action against them in his own way so therefore masters are warned to be careful in the way they treat their employees so these are all relationship related instructions all these things that Paul is urging the believers to do they would do it with an attitude of love sacrificially doing it to bring honor to the Lord because they revere and respect the Lord and when they do that it's like a fragrant offering to the Lord so in their office in their offices these Christian believers are offering a fragrant offering to the Lord in their homes in the way they are interacting with one another the family members are interacting with one another from that home there are fragrant offerings offerings rising up to the Lord having talked about those things now Paul moves into the final section where he says in verse 10 finally be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power because now he is going to start talking about the warfare which the believer will have to engage in because there is a great inheritance awaiting the believer there are spiritual riches in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus and the enemy will not want us to access any of those riches the enemy will not want us to become spiritually rich or in fact even do well on earth so the enemy is going to bring a lot of attacks against us and so even as we watch our attitudes and guard our attitudes by walking in the way of love we must also get ready to fight battles against the enemy so now he is coming to the final point where he is going to start talking about how we need to stay strong in God and resist the enemy and defeat whatever schemes the enemy tries to bring against us so moving into that in verse 10 he says finally be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power so in this final section the first opening instruction which is being given us on your own you may not be strong but you can be strong in the Lord with that mighty power which he makes available to us through that you can be strong so this battle that is going to be fought all these attacks which need to be dealt with which need to be overcome all of that does not need to be done in the human strength of the believer we need to be strong in the Lord and that word that is used over there the Greek word is endunamu so that you know it's from the truth word dynamo and so you know that's basically you know the dynamite was you know when the dynamite was invented that word was used for that particular you know weapon because it talks about power the man Alfred Nobel who made the dynamite who invented the dynamite he wanted a word for his creation which would indicate how powerful it is and so he chose this particular Greek word dynamo he chose that Greek word to name his invention to show off how powerful it is only thing of course the dynamite is destructive power it's not power which builds up or edifies or strengthens it's rather very destructive and negative but over here in verse 10 when it's saying be strong in the Lord it's talking about using this mighty power of the Lord to build ourselves up to build up the church to build up the kingdom of God so even though Nobel ended up giving this word a very negative connotation in the original Greek it was meant to have a very positive connotation it was supposed to be a power which will help, which will build which will you know break down evil but which will strengthen good so in that sense it was meant in that sense so he urges the believers to be strong in the mighty power of God and so having put on the power of God with his power through his enabling they go on to put on the full armor of God so in verses 11 onwards he begins to provide an introduction regarding the armor if we could have someone read out for us verses 10 to 14 yeah verses 10 to 14 please finally my brethren be strong in the Lord in the power of his mind put on the whole armor of God that you may be able to stand against the wills of the devil for we do not wrestle against flesh and blood but against principalities against powers against the rulers of the darkness of this age against spiritual halls of wickedness in the heavenly places therefore take up the whole armor of God that you may be able to withstand in the evil day and having done all to stand then therefore having girded your rest with truth haven't put on the brisk blood of righteousness yes so we are meant to fight the battle in the mighty power of God not in our own strength so relying on his mighty power we choose to put on the full armor because it is only by putting on this full armor that we will be able to take our stand against the devil's schemes it says over here so the only way to be able to withstand all these clever cunning schemes that the devil is going to come up with the only way we are going to be able to handle and deal with Satan is going to be by putting on this full armor and in verse 12 he explains what kind of powers are going to be attacking us it says for our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against the rulers, against the authorities against the powers of the dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms and that word that is used over there for our struggle is not against flesh and blood but against the rulers that word struggle over there was the word which the Greeks used for boxing and wrestling in those days when they had these boxing and wrestling matches it was sometimes a battle right up to death only one man would survive they would wrestle each other till one man is dead and the other man stands victorious because they were involved in a lot of blood sports so over here when that word is being used it's talking about a fight unto death you know so the devil wants to completely destroy us so we may not physically die but his aim is that our life should be completely destroyed all these riches which are available to us in Christ we should not be able to access even man of them or enjoy any of them and build ourselves up in any way in the Lord that is his aim so when he you know brings his schemes against us this is his goal to destroy us completely to finish us so this struggle that we are engaged in is not just something light we are literally struggling for our lives we are fighting for our inheritance we are fighting for the riches which belong to us Jesus has freely given us all the spiritual blessings of heaven but for us to access it and to enjoy it we literally have to fight a life and death battle on a daily basis and that is why this is not something that can be done in our human strength it is something that we would have to do in the mighty power of the Lord which is why the opening line then he says finally be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power put on the full armor of God so he talks about four different levels of demonic forces which would be engaged in this battle against the church so the first word that is used now in our English translations different versions would use different wordings but in the original greek let's look at what these four levels of demonic forces are so the first one I am just following the NIV over here it talks about how our struggle is against the rulers first of all so that word over there the greek word is arkas it is talking about the archaic we are more familiar with the archaic archaic all those words, the english words which come from this greek word arkas it is basically talking about something ancient something very very old so here Paul is saying first of all our struggle is against the ancient ones the old ancient ones why are these demonic powers called that maybe these are the ones which originally partnered with satan in the rebellion against god so these are the ancient ones the most powerful ones which took a stand against god and which were thrown flung to the earth because of their rebellion so these are the most powerful demonic forces under them you would have what the niv calls the authorities so these authorities are authorities which are holding delegated power the ancient ones have given this second line of authority they have delegated some of their power to these they are called the exusia in the greek bible so the rulers the ancient ones delegate and give some of their authority to these exusia and they are very very powerful and the third level of authority they are called the powers of this dark world the greek word that is used over there is kosmo kratos kosmo means world kratos means ruler so these are your world rulers so this third level the third level of demonic forces the world rulers are probably the rulers which you have over different territories of the earth so because i am in the oldest when we are talking we are reading the daniel passages we kind of get to know that certain demonic forces have control over certain territories so this third level of forces are the kosmo kratos the world rulers and they have been allowed to have authority over certain regions of the earth and under them you have the last the least powerful forces which are just your basic evil spirits so the spiritual forces of evil and the heavenly realms are just basically your evil spirits which go about doing the bidding of all the higher demonic powers we have these four levels of demonic powers fighting against the church and when we say that they are fighting against the church they are not just fighting against an institution they are attacking people believers, individual believers groups of believers, communities of believers wanting to break them apart bring disunity among them bring confusion distract them lead them away anything so that the kingdom of God will not be built that is their goal and so they have very personal hatred towards each individual believer we are up against such forces and so the average Christian goes through the day being so unaware of what they are up against which is what makes it so sad here Paul is urging us to take these things seriously because the attack is powerful the attack is great and Christian should be on the alert so rather than taking our spiritual work so casually assuming that the spiritual riches of heaven will just fall into our laps rather we should understand that the spiritual forces of darkness do not want us to gain our inheritance they do not want us to access our blessings even though we have been made so rich in Christ they are fighting on a daily basis to stop us and prevent us from gaining those riches so we should understand the seriousness of the battle and be strong in the Lord and use his mighty power to seriously put on the full armor and engage in battle so that we can gain all these things that Christ has gained for us which he has acquired for us through his sacrifice so when we come back from the break we will look at more details regarding this warfare so yeah alright then thank you


Welcome to All Hands Update. I'm petty officer Ian Cotter. Are you a talented artist or illustrator? Naval History and Heritage Command is asking for you to send in your artwork to join the Navy art collection. If you or someone you know is an artist you could be part of Naval History. There may be somebody on a ship who says you know that is a scene that I really think should go down in history. We're the place to send it if you've got some skills and you want to put some pencil to paper or brush to canvas and you want to capture a scene that really means something to you in your Navy experience. We're the people who collect that. You could submit your contact information and a photo of your artwork by emailing it to the curator Gail Monroe. Check out the Naval History and Heritage Command's website for more information.


What's up guys, my name is Michael and welcome to my YouTube channel today. We are going to go over link lists All right, so this is one of the series. I'm trying to redo. I'd like to really old series We're just literally reading a textbook and that's not how I like to make tutorials now. So Nowadays, I'm just going to try to implement the code with you guys and I'm going to explain Okay, so this video is gonna be everything you need to know about link lists So first a link list is a type of data structure. Okay, where each of The data is in something called nodes So if you look in this picture data all the data values see the a b cd They're inside these boxes called nodes, right? Now as you can see here in each node for each of these boxes, there is a pointer pointing to the next node So you see a the data of a there's a pointer next pointing to b and then B is next It's pointing to C and C's next is pointing to D Then these final node points to null Okay, so the last value that these point to is null. Okay This is a singly link lists Okay, you could also see that there is a pointer called head that points to the first node of our list So what are the what is the advantages of a link list? Okay, the First advantage of a link list is that if I want to remove something or insert something It is pretty easy because all I have to do is literally just add something and point it to the next value I just have to modify these pointers that points to the next value if I want to remove something I just have to find the previous node that I want to remove Point it's next to the to the node afterwards. Okay That's inserting and deleting right now. What is the problem of a link list? The problem is that I cannot access the nodes without starting from the top and Moving all the way down. So if I want to find the nodes see I can't access the node Of the other nodes. I have to start from a go to B And then finally get to see because the only way to go through a link list is to go through starting from the top of the head and Traversing by going through next. There's no way to actually get a certain value So if I want to go the value D I literally have to start from the top of a and Continuously go to the next value of B C and they go to D. So that's the problem about link lists So how would you implement this? All right, so now I'm gonna bring up the code and show you guys in OBS Okay, so how would you implement a link list? Okay? So first of all we need to have a class called node. This node is going to represent the boxes in the previous picture that we saw before Okay, now remember in the boxes There's two types remember the actual specific data and the pointer that's going to point it to the next value So here we have two variables that are public The first one is the data and this one in our sync. We're going to use integers Into types. We're not going to use like chars or like strings But you could literally put whatever you want in here if you really want to Now next we're going to have a pointer called node star next this pointer Next is going to point to the next node in our link list Okay, so now how would you traverse a link list and to print things out? This is what you would do. You would have a method called print list. Look at this method print list We have a node that we're starting from this is going to be node star and Okay, and what we're going to do is what we're going to say while it's not equal to null We are going to just print the data and then we're going to go on to the next node The reason why we're saying wilds n is not equal to null It's because remember in the last picture the last node is pointing to null So if we were to just continuously Traverse go to the next node until we reach null. That's how you would print all your values in your list So that's why we say while our starting node is not equal to null We're just going to print the node and go on to the next value Continuously do this until we reach the end where n is equal. Okay, so there are a few simple cases that we could think about Before you write insert So let's say I want to insert something to the front of our link list so in this case How you would do it is you would just take our new node Have its next pointer point to the front of the link list and then now then we just reset the our head variable to point to the new Head that we wanted to have so in this case we have a b c d in our link list, right? So what they did was they created a new node called e Have its next pointer point to a because a was the original front of the head Right, then what they did was they just now reset the Head variable to now to point to e so now in our new link list e is now inserted in the front of a So that's what? inserting to the front of Is like in link lists so the code of what it would look like is this They called this in this scenario. They called this as push But really it's actually add to insert to the front But yeah, so here they have two variables called head reference, which is just a point the Head node that was referenced to and they also have the new data that you want to add So this is kind of strange in that they didn't actually create the node yet but yeah, they just have the new data that's passed in as a Parameter in the input for for push so here what you would do is you would create your new node So here that's what they have here allocate node So this calls node star new node is equal to new node So this is going to create the new node then they put in the data that was passed in from our parameters In our for the push so this is going to do new node Get the data variable for a new node. It's going to equal to the new data. So that's what this is new data Then they're going to make the next of the new node as the head so this new node This new node dot next now. I'm going to point to the head of our original List so remember we had a bcd, right? This is this part The first two lines is basically creating e Right, then they're gonna set ease next to point to the first node, which is a so that's what this line is doing So the new nodes next is going to point to the head Then they're going to move the head to point to the new node. So that's what this does Star head reference is gonna point to the new node. So that's what this method push does This push method is actually just adding inserting to the front of the link list Yeah, I don't know why they called it push, but it is what it is Okay, so the next method that we have is called insert after and what this does is that it's gives Given the previous node that we have want we insert a new data that's passed in right after that node So remember in our example a bcd, right this in order to call this method what this is Expecting is that you already found the node C. So that's I want to insert. I don't know f after C what this method is expecting is that I'm going to find the node C and I'm going to given that already found the node C. It's going to insert f after C Right, so that's what this function is doing So I know I said like in our example is a bcd But uh, yeah, but here it's like We used integers, right? But it could be integers or characters or anything you want For the data type data could be anything But yeah in our example here for the sake of this video. It's integers Okay, so in this method It is basically taking the previous node and inserting a new node after it so here we have This first part is just checking if it's null if it's not in the list can't the previous node can't be null, right? So this is just like a check If in case of something something went wrong before Right, so this is finding the previous node first. So So what this does is it creates a new node called new node goes a new node Sets the new nodes data is equal to the data that's passed in It's going to make a new nodes next point to the previous nodes next right so if we had like a bcd, right and We want to insert f after C What this does is it's going to create the node f, right and then It sets the data to be the node f right and then here what it's going to do It's going to make the next of the new node as the next of the previous node So in this case, it's going to create F F's next All right, so we remember we want to insert f after C. So what's it? This is doing? It's it going to set f's next. It's going to point to whatever was previous is next so Remember we want a bcd right and we want to insert f after C. This is basically going to get D It's going to insert f's next to be the next node after which is D So now f's next is going to point to D And then we're going to just move the previous nodes equal to new node the previous nodes next again equal to new node So it's going to set C Point to f so then in the end we would have CFD Right, so basically I'll just show you guys what I mean So remember we have a b C D right this was what we had before let's say our list is like that And I want to insert f. I want to insert this new node f after C So what this method is doing is that it's basically saying hey, I got this I'm going to create this node called f and I'm going to set it between C and D Right, so to do that what I'm going to do is I'm going to get D So I need to get C's next which is D and have this f point to D right So then f is going to point to D Right, and then what it's going to do it's going to take the pointer of C's next point to f So we're going to get rid of this D and point C's next It's going to point to f So then in the end we have a b c f e Okay, so that basically means that we find actually inserted f between C and D. So that's what this method does So yeah, that's what this does. So previous nodes next. That's just taking C's next point to D So that's what it does C's next Points to f. Okay, so the last function that we have is a pen which is just going to insert something to the end I don't know why it's called a pen, but it's just insert something to the end of the link list so let's say I have like example was a a b C D and I want to insert E after So I'm going to insert E into this link list what it's going to do is it's going to Get the node D and it's going to create a new node Called E and it's going to insert E after D So that's what this says. So this is just adds The new node E to the end of the link list So how does this function work? So first of all you're given the head and you're given the data that the new data you want to add so what this does is it creates a new node calls a new node and then What this is doing yeah creates a new node and then this part is going to add The data to the new node. So that's what this does new node data is going to equal to new node a new data Here what this is used at doing is it's going to find the last node and To do that You're gonna have to Yeah, okay, so you're gonna have to continually traversing through the link list until you reach the end So remember that's what I said in the beginning of the video. So you have to literally do that So that's why they need this node last So no last points to head and they have to start from the beginning So that's why they say node last equals to head. So this thing is just pointing this node to the beginning They have this variable called last they're just pointing it's a beginning. They have to keep going to the end later on So they're gonna use this later Yeah, oh, okay here remember our new node. It's next has to point to no the reason why is because It's last value is no because it's not the end of the list, right? So we're adding We're adding e to the end of the list a bcd You so if I go back to this example a bcd e right ease next has to point to no Because that means that we're at the end of the list, right? We're at that last value Otherwise, this is not a otherwise. It's not the last value. So yeah, that's what it has here. So here New nodes data equal new data new nodes next is going to point to no so this that would mark it as the last value Yeah, so that's what this does new nodes x points no, okay, so Here's just an exact case in case if the list is already empty If the list is already if less is empty already, then we just have to change the heads node to the new node Right because we don't have to Like the list is empty. So we just have to create we had we just have to change their head Pointer point to the new node. We don't have to like loop through add it to the end Because there's nothing to loop through for Okay, so what this does is while last next is not equal to no It's just this is just gonna keep going to the next until we reach our last node. So Yeah, while last next is not equal to no, we're gonna keep going until we reach the last node Then once we reach the last node, we're going to set it equal to other than you know that we created so that's gonna create This this is what it's doing. It's basically going to So in the beginning we have ABCD, right? And let's say I want to create E So I'm gonna create a new node called E And a point it's next to null and then I'm gonna find the last node. So to find the last node I'm gonna start from a go to B You go to C and go to D until I finally reach the last node where these next is not equal to null So then I found the node D and then we're gonna set the next pointer These next is going to point to a new node that we added and that's going to be E So we're gonna do this that'll be E. So then in the end we have ABCD E and we inserted E Right after D like we wanted to before So, yeah, this is that's the case if you want to insert E after their original list of ABCD So that's this method okay, so now we're gonna have a driver code that actually runs our code and Actually creates a list because currently we just have a bunch of methods that creates linkless and it doesn't actually You have to run it, right? So here we have the start starting node in our main method The first we create the head and just point it to null. So then this is gonna create an empty list So now now we're going to just insert to the front. So we're gonna insert six to the front This is the method append. This is basically just inserting it to the front I don't know why they called this append in the implementation Which should be insert to the front because I think insert to the front is much easier to Understand but anyway, they called it a pen, but it's just inserting six of the front so in the end here you're gonna have six pointing to null, right because Six is next is gonna have B pointing to null because there's nothing after it. It's right because we only just inserted six Then we're gonna push seven to the beginning so this is gonna insert seven to the front So here we're gonna have seven points to six We're just points to null because we just append it's seven to the front. So we have seven six null And then let's try and then here we're gonna push one to the front. So here we're gonna have one seven six point to null Then we're gonna insert we're gonna add to the end append to the end So then what's gonna happen is we're gonna append four to the end. So this becomes one seven six four and goes to null and then we're going to Insert eight after seven so to do that We just so if we look at our initial list one seven six four, right? The head is currently pointing to one and if I we if I want to insert eight after seven What is seven so seven this the sevens note is the heads next so that's why they pass in Heads next and as this variable of the previous note If you wanted to insert after six you literally have to find the node six first by keep going next Until you find six and then you could insert Insert it so here we have insert after heads next which is seven Right they pass on the previous node for that and then they're gonna insert eight So it's gonna insert eight after seven so we're gonna have one seven eight six four No, and then it's gonna print the list. So then we're gonna have one seven eight six four No, and if you run it it should ideally print out the list correctly Okay, there's some errors. Let's see what's the problem Let's see see what's the problem Let's take insert after already has a body I copied this twice Oh, I already I copied this twice my bad. Let's just get rid of this. No, it should work Yeah, so we have one seven eight six four if you wanted to have like a bcd You would have to change it to characters and pass in characters You would have to change it to characters and pass in characters. So it's about the same thing Yeah, so now we've won seven eight six four So, yeah, that's the gist of inserting of link of a linkless implementation Now let's look at deletion. So I'm gonna talk about how to delete a node from a linkless So if you look at this example picture if I want to delete the value see how would I do it? Basically, I would have to find the node before see so be and I need to set this pointer to Point to whatever is after see so whatever's after see is D So I'm gonna set bees next pointer is gonna equal to D and then I'm gonna free see So that means when you say free and C plus was it just delete C So that's how you would delete it because in the end after when we traverse through the values It would be a B and then D Okay, so now let's go over the code of delete node I'm not gonna go over how to run it because basically you just delete it right you just call it delete node But um, yeah, we're gonna go over this sample code of how delete node works okay, so This first case is just checking if I'm if the value if the node I want to delete is the first node So if it is the first node Which is what this is checking right? It's not null and the In the temper, so it's not null and it's equal to the key Then all you have to do is just go to the next node and then delete the first node. Okay, so This temporary variable is just pointing to the first node and then this is just checking if you're deleting the first node So if this is this if you're actually deleting the first node All you have to do is just set it equal to the next Next node and then just delete the previous node Delete the one that you were at before then return So, yeah, that's what this temporary variable is this temporary variable Just is just pointing to the first node currently to the head. Okay. All right now now To actually delete the node you have to search through to find the previous node delete The same thing with like adding you have to search through it That's what's to paint about it. No link list. You have to actually find it Okay, so to search through it This is what this is what the code does So we have a temporary variable and it's pointing to the head Had to know remember Right here. It's pointing to the head Reference. So here what this is doing is it's going to check. Hey, is my next node Is is the current node? I'm currently at is it equal? Is it is it the value that I want to delete? That's what's checking Right, if the temporary node if it is it the value I want to delete. Okay So if it's not equal to key then I'm just gonna So I'm just going to the next node so temporary equal to the next and I'm going to store this previous variable is going to store the node before it So I have a previous variable called brief You just say originally we said to know but while we're traversing it. We're keeping track of our previous node Because then in the end we have the previous no, then we could delete it So that's what this while it was doing All right So if the if the node that we're trying to find it is in all so it's not in the list We just returned because we can't do anything. That's why we have this That's where we have this f statement All right. Now once we found the previous node that we want to delete we just set the previous node The nodes next equals to the the node that I'm currently at it's next so that so this is This is what it's doing. It's Let's say I have a B C D right So what this is doing is going to find let's say I want to delete C This code is going to find B So let's say we found B here and it's going to point B's next. Yeah, hold up It's going to point B's next to point to What's ever after C so whatever after C is D. So it's going to set B point to D and Then yeah, then it then that's what it does so here previous dot next is a Bees next so it's saying bees next it's going to point to Temp dot next and temp temp is our current value want to leave which is C So temps next is gonna times next it's D So it's going to set these next to point to D. So it would remove C And then here it deletes C by freeing it up the memory Yeah, in Java, you don't have to do it, but in C plus plus you have to do it So yeah, that frees up the memory And yeah, that's basically how you delete a node There's also another way to do it recursively I'm not I could go over how to do it Yeah, I'll go over how to do it so Yeah, I'm gonna copy it and I'll go over how to do it, but I'm not gonna run it though for this part So if you want to do it recursively, it's the same thing. You just have to find it and then actually delete it Okay, um mercy. Oh, why is it like that? That is not right. Okay? This is definitely not right, but whatever. Um, why is it like that? Okay. All right. Um, I Don't know why it's doing oh Why is it passing their reference of the pointer node? Super weird. Okay. All right. So if you want to do it You recursively Basically, you just have to keep calling next and then once you find it you just delete it Ideally you don't you don't Normally, you don't really do it this way, but Okay, uh, it's still each week. It's only this if statement expected declaration Okay, ah, whatever I think it's like that. Okay, expect the declaration to free. Okay. Yeah, it doesn't matter. Um, okay So here's how you would do it They should We should actually make this by how I wrote this twice. That's weird Okay Let me just get rid of this So I'll go over how to do it recursively. It's giving you some weird Okay, it's giving me compilers, but it's fine. We could just ignore it for now. I copy the incorrectly Okay, so if you want to delete it recursively It's actually they did some weird things. Okay, let's get rid of that. Okay. All right. Okay So if you want to delete it recursively Basically you have to keep going next recursively call The function and keep going next until you find the node and once you find the node you have to free it Okay, so here's how it works. Um, if the head is null that means We reach the end of the list and that we can't actually delete anything So that means that the element is not actually in the list. So for that we just like Just print out it's not in the list and we delete it, right? We should we return it because we did we can't delete it All right Then what we do is we need to check if we're actually at the node that we want to delete so for that we just check the value We check if the heads and data that we're at is equal to the value So value is a data that's we passed in to this method of delete node and It's the value that you want to check The value that you actually want to delete. So if we're actually if the data that if the Four we're at in the head is equal to the value that one delete Then we're gonna set a temporary Pointer of node. It's gonna equal to the current node. We're out of head We're gonna set head to equal heads next Okay, and then we're just gonna free up the Free up the know that we're at and then return Otherwise if we're not at the current node, we just recursively call next and pass in value until we reach the end of the list So, yeah, that's basically how you would delete it recursively. I didn't copy it correctly. So that's why I have a weird Thing here, but yeah That's basically how you would delete something recursively. I hope you guys enjoy this video This is everything you need to know about link lists at least single link lists the rest of the Functions you might need to implement They might ask an interview or just variations of Inserting and deleting which is something that which is not that difficult once you understand how to insert and delete So, yeah, we guys wrote this video right come subscribe. I'll check you guys later. Peace


Welcome to this lecture series on aspects of western philosophy module 36 and lecture number 36. So, this lecture is going to introduce existentialism focusing on its main features and some of the important concerns of existentialism as a I do not want to call it a philosophical moment because there was not such a moment as such. In that sense existentialism is a very unique and a very different approach to philosophy or has a place in the history of philosophy because these pictures you can see the you if you can identify them the first one is Nietzsche, we have already examined some of his views this is Heidegger and third one is this is Sartre, Rand Paul Sartre. And here comes this is Sorin Kierkegaard, so they are all different types of philosophers for instance Kierkegaard is Sartre would call him a theistic existentialist and Sartre would define himself or understands himself as an atheistic existentialist and Heidegger is one person who would not probably like to associate himself with existentialism, he rather hated that label of existentialism and Nietzsche is a one person who was active in philosophy when the moment called existentialism was not was yet to come out. So, in that sense you know you can see all these diversity in existentialism and probably one philosopher who claimed himself as an existentialist in this picture is Sartre who actually claimed that he is an existentialist and he has also written a book existentialism and humanism which is a defense of existentialism, a defense in the sense you know it is an answer to various critics from various directions from the communists from the Christians from various other directions. So, in this lecture we will see some of the important features and try to situate it in the context of historical development both in philosophy as well as in western history. So, it is very difficult to say that existentialism is the result of the works done by a group of philosophers who agreed upon certain common notions and all that very difficult to identify such common themes yet there were there were attempts even including Sartre try to sort of identify something which can be understood as the most important feature of existentialism which is according to Sartre the dictum existence precedes essence. We will discuss that later, so here there is some sort of a definition or some sort of a description of existentialism which is given by Charles Worth he says I quote it was one could say more an intellectual mood or atmosphere than a coherent creed or body of doctrine more an outlook or mindset than a philosophical party line more a method or approach than a school of thought and it was very much a creature of the wasteland that was Europe during and after the last two last world war. So, this is a this keeping this in line this is mind this particular description of existentialism in mind let us move on to identify some of the important features though as I mentioned earlier this is not an attempt to identify some of the common features which which are said to be essential for all philosophers who would identified themselves as existentialist, but just to see some of the features first one is characterized by a reaction of the philosophy of man against the excess of the philosophy of ideas and the philosophy of things. So, the in one sense this statement implies that traditionally western philosophy has been mostly a philosophy of ideas and philosophy of things where in that process man get neglected. So, existentialism can be seen as a kind of a response a reaction to this feature it understands existence in a concrete sense of living or lived reality. So, this is another there are certain terms like lived experiences or living reality these are some of the terms which you will find repeatedly figuring in when you read existential literature because the focus is on the individual and the concrete manifestations of human existence. What I mean by a concrete manifestations are like you know the kind of experiences human concrete human beings have rather than problems of humanity or universal humanity there are problems which each individual a concrete individual phases in his or her life day to day life problems in relationships and various other issues traditionally philosophers have never dealt with such issues. Traditional philosophy has always been a philosophy of ideas or philosophy of things, but here these thinkers these 20th century philosophers sort of try to argue that what is more important is man himself or herself accuses philosophical traditions of ignoring the concrete man and his problems. So, this is what I mentioned the concrete man and his problems are ignored completely by these traditional thinkers. Now, let us see what is meant by understanding human existence when existentialist say that what is important is existence of man they are not interested in an a priori an impersonal conception of human reality. This is again a very important aspect of existentialism there is a kind of turn towards concrete human existence the man who exist the man who live his lived experiences his anxiety his dread his worries and problems. So, these are the concerns of existential thing is not an a priori an impersonal conception of human reality they are concerned with again it is not to understand man in terms of some fundamental rational concepts like what was advocated by philosophers like Plato, Descartes, Kant, Hegel etcetera. For example, in the case of Plato you have this notion of essence. So, Plato as a philosopher conceived what is philosophically relevant what is philosophically significant is the idea the essence of man is important not concrete human beings concrete human beings he conceived are imperfect copies of that idea of man. So, all substantial philosophical problems deal with these abstract universal ideas for Plato where does the concrete human being figure in such a situation again Descartes where he begins with the thinking the cogito the thinking I which is again not a very concrete individual who lives in a world, but it is a very abstract entity Kant and Hegel all of them you know there is a emphasis on structures of universal rationality in Kant the structures of mind the twelve categories and Hegel talks about an absolute in which everything is consumed under everything is brought under that absolute for Hegel where there is no scope for anything which is concrete and particular. So, this overdose of universalism and absolutism and abstract theorization would eventually neglect the human situatedness the human worries the concrete human being what Heidegger would term as the being in the world the world where in the midst of you know things and objects and other human beings with a lot of problems and worries. Focus on the concrete living individual in his actual preoccupation with himself and the world. So, this is what I said the actual relationship between the world of objects and other people and again you know how I preoccupy myself I mean when I live in this world myself conceptions what I do the kind of worries I have I mean the kind of being I create out of this world in which I live. So, through my lived experiences I can put it in that way. So, these things are the focal concern and to derive the meaning of the individual man from living or lived experiences of concrete individuals and their surroundings. Now, let us come to some important concerns again not to identify common concerns, but some important concern which appear here and there in the work in the writings of these thinkers live one's life. This is very important because the moment you emphasize on concrete existence of man you know what you mean by each individual's concrete existence is unique. So, this is what Heidegger means by authenticity when he says that when he distinguishes authentic human existence from inauthentic ways of existing which is again rearticulated by Sartre through his concept of bad faith which is where you inauthentically exist. So, where the emphasis is that you should live your own life do not try to imitate others you live in a concrete situation you have to take decisions you cannot blame others for your life what is happening to your life take responsibility. These are some of the important concerns associated with this then again existential questions are important death meaning of human existence God and man values in life nature of relationships etcetera. So, these are considered as existential problems rather than universal problems concerning human essence or universal human nature or anything of abstract nature these problems are very concrete you know when I say I am concerned about death it is about death which affects me my death or death of those people whom I know. So, it is a concrete reality for me it is not an abstract philosophical concept again meaning of human existence what is that meaning when I raise this question I would eventually have to find an answer to this question from the context in which I live in this world. So, what things happen to me all those things that happen to me my historicity is very important in finding answers to these questions like values in life for instance my relationship with other people my relationship with God all these are problematized and in all such problems you can see the concrete human being comes to the forefront rather than an abstract universal humanity. Questions on the universal and objective values are suspended like essence of man value and meaning of life etcetera and concern for human freedom and choices and other issues related to this like direct anxiety etcetera concern for human freedom and choices like what do you mean by freedom freedom is essentially understood by existential thinkers as something which the ability and the freedom to make choices in your life. So, when you make a choice naturally you know you know that you are making the choice and you are anxious about what is going to happen. So, there is anxiety there is dread there is a lot of anxiety about what would be the impact or the result of the choice which you are going to make. This is a quote from a Jasper's book who himself is a very important prominent member of this existential movement the books title is philosophy of existence I quote already in the 19th century moments with this turn of mind kept recurring people wanted life wanted reality to live wanted really to live they demanded realism instead of wanting merely to know they wanted to experience for themselves everywhere they wanted to genuine wanted the genuine searched for origins and wanted to press on to man himself superior men became more clearly visible at the same time it became possible to discover the true and the real in the smallest particle and quote. So, the catch word is instead of wanting merely to know they wanted to experience for themselves I would rather identify this as the most important statement in this paragraph which I read out. So, here existentialism has been divided into two classes two types of existentialism mostly done by Sartre it is theistic and atheistic. So, the theistic existentialist are people like Saur and Kierkegaard who is also being understood as the founder of which is not a real apt expression the most important thinker in the existential movement that is in Kierkegaard has been regarded by many as the founder of existentialism Martin Buber Paul Thilich Gabrielle Marshall and Carl Jaspers these are some of them they for them God exist and the atheist people prominently are Ron Paul Sartre then Simone de Beauvoir Federich Nietzsche Nietzsche is again as I mentioned you know it is very difficult to classify Nietzsche as an existentialist but still Martin Heidegger. This is also another very condensious issue because whether Heidegger can be treated as an existentialist he himself which he does not want to be categorized as an existentialist then there are others like Albert Camus who are absurdist and also shared a lot of other concerns with the existentialist referred to distance themselves from the existential movement and for them God does not exist or is not problematized for Heidegger for instance it is not problematized at all hence no values and meaning since people like Nietzsche and Sartre since they are visibly atheistic they would deny the conception of values which are transcendental or metaphysical there is no such transcendental and metaphysical values or meaning for human life which is fixed a priori so they would emphasize or rather Sartre would do it more explicitly emphasizing on you know creating one's own essences through existence the way one the exists the choices one makes in one's life and essentially you know one exists by making choices so by making such choices one exists and through which one makes oneself so that is the process which these people would prominently identify as part of their existentialism and absurdity is another concept which I have already mentioned people like Albert Camus and many others again let us come back to common features once again existentialism was not a rational philosophical system like rationalism or empiricism I have already mentioned this it was existentialist ideas were popularized through art and literature as well philosophers philosophizes not with reason alone see for instance Sartre was a novelist and some of his very important philosophical ideas were articulated through novels and short stories for instance his famous novel Nosia which is probably his first philosophical novel is Nosia and there are prominent stories like the world and all where he expresses the ideas of existentialism through these media and Albert Camus is another prominent literary figure who is a Nobel laureate for literature his novels and short stories or they contain a lot of existential elements and another very important aspect as I mentioned you know existentialism is not something which originated with one thinker in the classical sense of the term it is always been there and you know these philosophers particularly Sartre and Camus and many others they were all inspired by not only by philosophers but also by other kinds of intellectuals like poets and artists and novelist and others for instance Shakespeare was a major inspiration Dostoevsky is a very prominent inspiration for existentialist Kafka Franz Kafka his short stories particularly very famous story metamorphosis these are all very important literature for the existential movement and in that sense it is a very different form of philosophy there is no common doctrine which all the existentialist would be arguably advocating begins from man as an existent subject and not just a thinking subject so this is this is a very important concern you know it begins with man man is a not just a thinking substance like Descartes conceived to be but a kind of existent subject not a substance subject which means you know you are living in this world that is why you know this emphasis on lived experiences and lived reality they call it the man who feels wills loves hates and do many other things in this world so it is a being in the world where I exist as a concrete human being by relating myself with others and other objects and the world the world of objects where I hate them love them and do many other things again philosophers who were identified with it were very different from each other as I already mentioned you know Kierkegaard was a theist for his philosophy was predominantly a system where he is one of the major concern Kierkegaard was to the relationship between man and God and for Sartre for that matter there is no God so you have totally different contradictory kind of views and perspectives but still they there are certain very important features which put them all under the umbrella of existentialism theist atheist phenomenologist hermeneuticians absurdist etcetera all these are philosophers who I mean different kinds of people who participated in the movement there are a theist and phenomenologists Heidegger is a phenomenologist for that matter and hermeneuticians Heidegger again is person hermeneuticians absurdist like people like Albert Camus, Inesco, Samuel Beckett all these people were not academic philosophers Beckett and Inesco for that matter they were they were artists but they were and there are a lot of painters and other people against metaphysics that is purely speculative see this is one common feature we can say that you know the overdose of metaphysics which you would find in the philosophical systems of all almost all traditional thinkers you would not find in the these philosophies against systematization of reality because the major aspect of reality which these people are concerned with is the human reality which is a lived human reality which is a concrete human being and it is very difficult to systematize concrete human being because each human being is different and unique emphasis on individuality again it is a reaction and response to certain important historical and political development like any other philosophy there is a kind of very creative negotiation that happens between what is happening in the historical, political and cultural domain and in the domain of ideas and thinking so here also we can see that it is a reaction and response to certain very important historical and political developments a response to certain dominant approach in ancient and modern dominant approaches in ancient and modern philosophy the importance given to essence of our existence and it is a reaction against the totalizing philosophy of Hegelian idealism which we have already seen Hegel consumes everything under the Hegel the absolute becoming as a passage from non-existence to existence Hegel advocates the absorption of existence into essence everything is absorbed under one entity which is the absolute for Hegel. Now with regard to the social and historical factors the loss of faith is a very important catalyst or rather not just a catalyst very actively you know it contributed to the existential temperament emergence of this kind of a philosophy. Religion losing it power which is being described beautifully by Nietzsche in his expression death of God then again the two world wars gave rise to feelings of despair and disbelief in all established social political and moral order. So, the two world wars shattered European what you call foundationalist values system and this ultimately you know resulted actually in that sense Nietzsche was predicting it the kind of faith in this death of God that what is eventually going to happen and then again this is another important aspect the rise of ideologies like fascism, Nazism and Communism none of them reserve a space a respectable space for the individual in it. So, they are all totalizing systems and you can see the way in which political power is so centralized in these systems in fascism and Nazism you know the fascism which originated in Italy Mussolini was the sole leader of fascism and in Hitler's Germany Nazism Hitler was the sole leader and Communism again we had seen you know what is happened in Russia like people like again dictators like Stalin have emerged they have crushed suppressed all free thinking and there was no respect absolutely no respect for the individual freedom or concerns of the individual or any of those things and modernity is all absorbing absolutism characterized by Hegelianism and industrialization and urbanization which eventually made man a tool see the one of the impacts of industrialization is it is a separating man from nature or the kind of relationship man had with nature has been substantially revised drastically redefined with industrialization and urbanization because that kind of an intimate association with nature complete dependency on nature was revised to a kind of domination relationship where emphasis was more on controlling nature and changing it to one's own requirements. So, this is resulted in a kind of change of value system complete change of value system which ultimately resulted in this kind of you know social political and cultural you know events which Europe has with us in 20th century. So, here let us see this figure this talks about thinking about human existence traditional and modern philosophical categories are inadequate to understand human reality. So, what happens in traditional systems is say for instance here man is understood as a thinking substance or a rational being for instance thinking substance by Descartes rational being which is largely by modern philosophers epistemological subject by rationalism and emperism mind body kind of dualism union whatever which was problematized by the modern philosophers again and then there are this materialistic tendencies which would identify man essentially as a physical entity. So, in all these things you know where is the man the concrete living man who is in the world relationship with things and other people in this world where is that concrete man in this whole picture. So, that is a question existentialist were raising. So, the uniqueness of the concrete and real as over against the abstract and possible and not on existence as such to our way of encountering existence and not an objective interest in an existence which is indifferent in regard to the multiple existence, but a subjective interest in the peculiar existence which everyone of us is. So, this is what when you talk about existence focus of existence does not I mean it does not mean that you know philosophers are concerned about existence as a very abstract philosophical problem or a philosophical idea, but their concern is not on existence as such, but our way of encountering existence and each one of us encounter our existence differently that uniqueness is being emphasized each one of us. So, it is not an objective interest in existence, but which is indifferent and you know there are, but the subjective interest in the peculiar existence each individual what is that kind of concrete human self is the locus where existence is discovered. So, when we talk about the precursors of modern of this existential moment I have already mentioned their names you have Soren Kirkegaard who is the Danish philosopher, then you have Fedor Dostovsky who is a Russian writer and novelist whose novels like Crime and Punishment, Brothers Karamos who more prominently they contain a lot of existential ideas, Frederick Nietzsche which whose philosophy we have already discussed and Kafka is another very important writer. So, when you talk about Kirkegaard he pitched it against the Hegelian absolute system which absorbs all individuals and particularities. So, which does not reserve any space for the individual concrete particular human being. So, this is something which he challenges for Kirkegaard genuine philosophical experience is a personal experience it is a subjective experience opposes the rational explanations to justify God's existence. Because as I mentioned for Kirkegaard the relationship between man and God is a central problem of philosophy and this relationship cannot be theorized it is something which needs to be experienced by every individual it is an experiential problem rather than a theoretical issue in Kirkegaard. So, this is from Anderson's book it say I quote faith constitutes a sphere of a sphere all by itself and every misunderstanding of Christianity may at once be recognized as its transforming it into a doctrine transferring it into it to the sphere of the intellectual. So, this is his complaint about the established Christianity though he himself was sort of concerned about the biblical God Christ experience of God etcetera. And emphasis was on subjective and the personal choice personal things are more important than objective and universal realities everything is subjective and personal and objectivity is a myth and subjective and personal choice is the crux of human existence there are and in this context he refers to three spheres of existence in an individual individual's life which an individual might undergo it is not necessary that each one of us would be undergoing all the three stages, but these are the three possibilities according to him where one or two one has to make choices whether to continue in one particular sphere or move on to the next one and these are the choices the aesthetic the ethical and the religious. So, the aesthetic is where live for physical or intellectual pressure like Don Juan who is completely immersed in the world of pleasures and where it seeks the most immediately pleasing thing there is absolutely no concern for something which is deeper and in ones on life. So, the second one is ethical where there is a recognition of some certain common ethical norms except moral responsibility and lead a life of duty of moral duty to moral law. So, there is recognition of duty recognition of a moral law which is binding to the individual, but even this stage it is also has its problems. So, the next stage is the religious stage where life is completely deported to God and give up everything ethical standards and the universal good everything is given up complete devotion to God. So, that is the highest stage and here the interesting point which Kierkegaard's philosophy tells us is that these spheres of existence or stages of life's ways each containing its own system of values when you are in that particular sphere you follow certain value system. And to move from one to another is a personal choice there is nothing like a common a priori given strategy or requirement that you should go I mean there is no teleology that binds you to make a choice in a particular way it is a personal choice which each person has to experience and do actually make it. A choice not guided by any meta principles and a rational leap. So, he says that from one stage to the next is an irrational leap it is not it cannot be based on certain rational calculations of free choice which cannot be further defended and the individual passionate and discontinuous proceeding by sudden leaps and crisis which he encounters in his life owing to his very peculiar historicities and situativeness. And Dostoevsky as I mentioned is another very important figure very important influence in the extensional moment problematized human limitations, agonies, anxieties and helplessness. The human confusions and problems through his novels this is his masterpiece novel brothers Karamosov. So, conversation between two characters intellectual Ivan and his brother Alyosha. Alyosha is more a kind of a god intoxicated man while Ivan is visibly an intellectual who leaves who theorizes. So, let us see the conversation. So, this is what Ivan tells Alyosha I quote you know dear boy there is an old sinner in the 18th century who declared that if there were no god he would have to be invented and man has actually invented god. So, this question whether man has invented god or god made man that is a question that is a problem and again it says and what is strange what would be marvelous is not that god should really exist. The marvel is that such an idea the idea of the necessity of god could enter the head of such a savage vicious beast as man again Dostoevsky again one more passage from brothers Karamosov and this is again said by Ivan to Alyosha and so I accept god and I am glad to and what is more I accept his wisdom his purpose which are utterly beyond our kin. I believe in the underlying order and the meaning of life I believe in the eternal harmony in which they say we shall one day be blended yet in the final result I do not accept this world of gods and although I know it exists I do not accept it at all it is not that I do not accept god you must understand it is a world created by him I do not and cannot accept unquote. So, this situates the man a concrete man in a context and Kafka is another very remarkable writer isolation of the individual is so prominently characterized by him the individuals plays in the world the anxiety and guilt experienced by individuals all these things are highlighted by him and Nietzsche we have already seen you know the way in which he was declaring that all truth is perspectival and again with this declaration of the death of god how he propagated a kind of nihilism of morals everything is permitted as truth is perspectival there is nothing like the path ok. So, in that way you know he was also advocating a very unique kind of philosophical position knowledge and truth are provisional and change over time and with the ruling class and there are many kinds of truths and consequently there is no truth unquote this is from will to power. So, you have a very interesting concept of truth here by Nietzsche he says truth is an edifying name for what are really vital lies and what Kierkegaard says is objective truth is existentially irrelevant and what Sarth says is no universal truth. So, with this you know let us revisit the key themes of existentialism there is an emphasis on freedom where we are condemned to be free this is by Sarth very famous statement by Sarth we will address this problem in the next or some of the subsequent lectures. Then the concept of responsibility because we have freedom in our fundamental projects and attitudes we are responsible for the people we become. So, this is again a very concrete problem not a problem which is an abstract philosophical issue which human beings are facing, but a concrete problem which every individual would be face differently or the intensity would also be different. There are different types of people right there are different types people's temperament differ from each other. So, accordingly you know the way in which they conceive their problems also would change. Emphasizing individuality his or her search for authentic selfhood is a major issue ideas of self creation and authentic existence become important in this context. We have already examined how Heidegger problematizes the problem of authentic existence. Then again the this problems like angst, dread, anguish, anxiety when we reflect on our freedom we experience this kind of an inescapable anxiety and inauthentic existence and bad faith we have already made reference to those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves and living an inauthentic existence in bad faith. They are self deluded and again finitude, guilt, alienation, despair, death. They are not topics of discussion in traditional philosophy, but these thinkers take up them with some very remarkable originality. Acknowledgement of the tragic elements of human existence some are even pessimists and absurdists while some others speak about hope. See for instance Albert Camus begins his famous book The Myth of Sisyphus with the statement that the most serious philosophical problem of 20th century is that of murder and suicide. See the kind of tragic element is being highlighted and there are of course philosophers like Kierkegaard who talk about hope. So, you cannot say that you know all of them belong to one particular school, but they all reflect certain common concerns. The best one I mean probably the ideal candidate for a common theme in the works of all existentialist philosophers would be this existence precedes essence which is actually I believe it is coined by Sar because it is in his book in his various articles he has written about it. We do not have a standard existence, but we create ourselves. There is a lot of emphasis on personal freedom. There is nothing like you know I model myself on a universal humanity, but there is nothing like a standard norm given to me on which I can model my existence, but my existence is a very concrete process where because I find myself in a very unique situation which is not there for others and my historicity is different, my relationship context are different everything is different. So, the way in which I create myself since I have freedom to create myself is definitely going to be different from the ways in which other people would be creating themselves. Unlike other entities where their essential properties are fixed a priori human beings make themselves through their choices and actions and again there is no a priori essence like human nature or essence that determine man. We will probably discuss this again in the next lecture when we analyze when we try to understand Sarth's position. Again human beings have no model blueprint, no ideal essence or perfect nature for humans, man makes his or her essence, first man exist and he or she create the essence. So, this is something which characterizes human existence from other the existence of other objects that he first exist and then creates his essence unlike other objects say for example, a pen which initially I mean which first the essence of this pen is already there before its creation. The man who created it the man who produced it must be having a blueprint an idea about it what is going to produce, but in the case of man there is nothing of that sort. Passions, emotions and instincts are not really irrelevant when I create myself. See it is a process in which I create myself through living through various things I do through my actions and thoughts and feelings and emotions. All these things play a very important roles in this process of self creation and there is you know this Nietzsche's concept of will to power becomes extremely relevant in this context and passion to exist Kirkagard says Heidegger says that the Zion is mine and is being in the world and Sartre says being in itself and being for itself. We will explicate what this is in the next lecture, but just to mention being in itself is the things which where essence precedes existence, but being for itself is where you know the being of man where existence comes first and then through living through choices he makes he creates his essence. So, when we try to distinguish these two important terms essence is what a thing is that which is definable in a thing we call its essence. So, when we define an object we often isolate the essence of that object and say that this is what the object is. So, what is intelligible about an object and many considered essence as superior to existence and even absolved it into essence like Hegel. On the other hand existence is that the thing is not easily definable because it is something which keeps on changing. Again existentialism gives priority to existence of our essence and see it is very important to note this distinction that man is rational animal or a thinking substance. There is all an a tendency to essentialize man that man is a thinking being or a thinking animal rational animal where which denies man a freedom narrowing down human existence to that, but what Sartre would argue is that it is not so. So, there is no in the case of man the existence precedes essence and then I make myself whether I am going to a painter or musician or whatever it is my choices which would enable me to achieve my essence. Existence is characterized by concreteness and particularity it implies givenness of a fact the existence of a camera or a pen or whatever you have its existence is not my creation for instance it exist as something it is it is there the camera the pen the book the computer they are all there and to exist is derived from the Latin word existere which means to stand out or emerge to stand out from nothing to exist is to have a place in the world real world concreteness is asserted existence is concrete and particular while essence is abstract and universal. So, in this context I mean it is important to distinguish existentialism from essentialism or essentialism from existentialism. We have seen that you know all this traditional philosophers have been emphasizing a lot on the problem of essence the problem of abstract essences and essences have always been a central idea in traditional philosophy and where predominantly you know these traditional philosophers considered existence is illusory essences are universal and are unchangeable the notable I mean a striking example is that of Plato. Everything is a copy and essences alone are real Plato conceived only essences as realities and treated existence of particular as illusory contingent and changeable and Hegel's totalizing philosophy everything is absorbed into the absolute. So, is absolutism and now when you try to understand the concept of existence in existentialism it is to distinguish the unique way in which man exist in the world only man exist in the case of other objects as I already mentioned essence is prior, but in the case of man existence is prior highlights ontological peculiarity of man's being the being of man is understood in terms of facticity, thronus and particularity we have already discussed these concepts when we discussed Heidegger's philosophy. What do they mean like facticity somewhere thronus I find myself in a world in a world of objects and other people middles of this world and particularity all these are my experiences limitations and scopes of man being are the problems here facticity, thronus, transcendence on the one hand there is facticity I find myself in a particular situation and to some extent I am constrained by I am limited to that situation, but at the same time there is a transcendence like I have certain projects objects have certain meaning forming. So, I approach the world with certain projects I have plans aspirations desires and then again there are problems like alienation and authenticity must be understood in this context. So, existence for Kierkegaard is the contingent the particular that which refuses to fit into some system constructed by rational thought and Heidegger calls it man's being and Sartre concept of existence unfolds with the explication of being in itself, being for itself and being for others this will these concepts we will examine in detail in subsequent lectures. So, this is the let us now wind up this lecture we will just summarize the topics which we have discussed today. We have seen the emphasis the kind of emphasis existential philosophers giving to individuality, particularity and subjectivity and there is no conception of objective truth, subjectivity, disclosure and unconcealment or concepts which were emphasized. We have seen this when we discussed Heidegger how Heidegger conceives truth as disclosure or unconcealment and when it comes to Nietzsche Nietzsche says that all truths are lies truths becomes truth become perspectival. So, and a perspectival truth is not truth at all. So, these are some kind of things which we have examined and emphasis on lived experience like passions, emotions, fears, anxieties, confusions etcetera and then we have seen the kind of tensions between universalities, the situativeness of human experience and the kind of universality which will be further explicated in the next lectures and Throners versus Absolute Existence. Existence precedes essence which is probably arguably the most important concept and freedom and responsibility are emphasized in this context. So, we will wind up this lecture here, this lecture on existentialism and introduction it was basically and now we will see in the next two lectures and out in the philosophy the existential philosophy of Jean-Paul Sartre through is probably can be considered as the most important philosopher among the in the in the existential moment. So, we will see that in the next lectures. This lecture we will wind up here now. Thank you.