Hello everyone, and thanks for joining me My name is Alejandro Aguirre, and I'm going to present joint work with Shinai Katsumata from the National Institute of Informatics in Tokyo So our motivation behind this work is studying the notion of weakest precondition in a formal manner So in a very simplified way in program verification Weakest preconditions can be used to check that a program satisfies a whole triple So we have a program that is specified by a whole triple P as a precondition and Q as a post-condition Then this whole triple is satisfied only if P implies the weakest precondition of F and Q and this is a very useful technique that can be applied in a lot of settings For instance for programs with side effects such as non-termination or probabilities and It also supports quantitative notions of predicates and not only Binary predicates but predicates that have real values for instance Being a bit more concrete we can see a program as a map F from memories to memories and What WP does it computes inverse image of predicates, so we have a predicate Q which is a subset of M then The WP of F and Q is the inverse image of Q Along F And crucially this WP is composable meaning first The WP of skip and Q is just Q and secondly if they do have a programming composition F composed with G Then the WP of F composed with G is the composition of the individuals WPs In a contrarbarian manner if you want to add effects to this setting One common manner of adding effects is by using a monad So we assume that our computational effects are captured by monad T and Now we want to compute WP of F and Q But now we cannot directly apply the inverse image because Q Is a subset of M, but it's not a subset of TM So we first need to have some way of mapping Q to a predicate over TM and this is what T dot does Which is what we call the lifting of T and then in this case what WP does is it first applies the lifting to Q and then it computes the inverse image of T dot Q So now we also want to Ask whether WP is composable But now the question is a bit different because skip is no longer the identity program is actually the unit of the monad T And F composed with G Is no longer normal composition is a closely composition So instead of having G composed with F we have G sharp composed with F where G sharp is the closely lifting of G and this is the question we cannot work and It's what we try to answer So in this talk the contributions we present are a characterization of WPs in a general effectful setting Using the notion of vibration in category theory and we are able to characterize WPs exactly as Some special kind of liftings of monads That I will explain later Then we apply these Techniques to the domain vibrations which are vibrations that capture Normal notions of predicates such as binary predicates or real value predicates also show how to combine Monads to compose effects and Finally instantiate all this theory to Concrete examples to recover Transformers in the literature we begin by studying pre-gesture conditions in a general setting And for this we're going to use vibrations So a vibration is a situation in which we can take the inverse of an object in P Along a morphism in C Being a bit more concrete for every object in C. We can define its fiber, which is you know by P sub X when X is the object and This Px is a poset of Objects that get mapped to X amorphisms that get mapped to the identity of X And if you have a morphism in C going from say X to Y then you can compute a Functor from the fiber over Y to the fiber over X and this functor is going to compute inverse images This is summarized by the diagram if we have F going from X to Y and we have Q above Y Then we can compute the inverse image, which is denoted F star Q and the morphism in P going from F star Q to Q We denoted by bar F and we also call it the Cartesian lifting determined by F and Q So some examples of vibration for instance We can look into the vibration from the category of predicates and the category of sets Where the vibration just maps up predicate to its base set Or we could look into the forgetful factor from topical spaces to set I'll note so the forgetful factor from the category of binary relations To set square so if we want to add effects into this setting we do this using monads So first we have a monad T over C that captures the computational effect of Of our programs and then we define a monad T dot on P that needs to satisfy Competitivity commutativity, sorry of these three diagrams So what the first diagram expresses is that if we have a predicate Q over X Then T dot Q is a predicate over TX And then the second and the third diagram They require that P maps the unit and the multiplication of the T dot monad to the unit and multiplication of the T monad And all this data packed together it forms a triple that we call a like stress tractor Which is a setting which we can define because preconditions and we do this as follows If we have a DAX extractor defined by P, T and T dot Then the precondition WP is exactly the inverse image Induced by the vibration so WP of F and Q is F star of T dot Q And once we have defined the WP we can also define whole triples So a whole triple is satisfied If P implies WP of F and Q So now of course we want to look into composability So we can think of two programs F Going from X to TY and you're going from Y to Z And in the category C we can compose them using closely composition and we have predicate Q over Z in P Then there's Two ways of computing the inverse image. We can just compute the inverse image of the composition Which is the lower path from the diagram or we can compute first the inverse image along G and then the inverse image along F Which is the upper path from the diagram And by the universality of the inverse image There's always going to be this implication But in general there's not going to be any quality So of course we would like to Characterize the cases in which we have an exact equality between these two inverse images and this Equality which is as composability is satisfied if and only if the dice restructure is Cartesian So we require that T dot is fibered and furthermore that Satisfies these two extra conditions So the first condition Precise that The unit of the T dot monad is not only map to the unit of the T monad by P but it's also the Cartesian morphism above eta and Same for the multiplication of the T dot monad. So in general This kind of Cartesian leaf things are not very common So for these monads on this table, this is actually an exhaustive List of the Cartesian leaf things. So this is the maybe monad. This is the Power and not 90 paracet monad it is present monad and monad composition So you need to read the table right now. I'm going to explain some of the examples, but the point here Is that if you want to be able to exhaustively list Liftings for this monad then we need some techniques that allow us to To prove that there are no no more liftings and this is what we're going to do in the second part of the talk for some specific kind of vibrations So now we study the concrete setting of domain vibrations from a lack slice category So a lack slice category is defined as follows. We first Have a category C and we pick an object omega and we assume that every Homeset with omega as a Codomain is ordered And we further assume that pre-composition is monotonic. So anything manner to obtain these conditions are by Assuming that omega is ordered itself and that the Homeset order is just the point-buss order of functions And then we build a slice category C slash omega that has as objects morphisms in C that have Omega as a codomain So for instance I going from X to Omega or J going from Y to Omega And as morphisms morphisms In C between the domains So F from X to Y that makes this diagram commute lastly Meaning that this path of diagram is less than this path of the diagram and This is known as a domain vibration Because the maps Morphisms to its to their domain so I gets mapped to X and J gets mapped to Y And I we want to Look at the extra structures in this setting And to do this we first look at monotone algebras because there's a tight connection So monotone algebra is a part of a functor F and an algebra of F That preserves the ordering of Homesets in the following way So we have I less than J then The two ways of going from FX to Omega one through I and your one through J are ordered in the same manner as This these two so if I is less than J, then this path of the diagram is less than this path of the diagram And we have two monotone algebras Oh, I'm an idea of F and oh prime an algebra of G Then a morphism between these two algebras is a natural transformation between the functors That makes this diagram commute exactly and now this This data both the monotone algebras and morphisms of monotone algebras from a monoidal category That has us Junit the identity Functor and the identity algebra and as operation the Algebra composition and functor composition And now the the point of this is that there's a monoidal isomorphism between the this category of monotone algebras and the category of fifth of fiber functors and Cartesian two cells between them Now I'm not going to give details of what this category is The main point is that this is a category of endo functors and A monoidal in this category is exactly a pair of a monad T and a Cartesian lifting of this monad So now we can find the monoidal object in the category of M alge and get a objective correspondence between Cartesian liftings and a special kind of algebras and And this monoid object in M alge is exactly a pair of a Monad and an Eilenberg Moore monotone t algebra So now that the point of this slide is that there's a objective correspondence between monotone EM monotone t algebras and Cartesian liftings so to construct Cartesian liftings it's enough to find monotone t algebras which are easier to find But sometimes we also want to combine effects So for instance, we may want to combine non determinism and probabilities on non-termination and determinism and the way this is usually done is By finding a distributive law so distributed law is just Between two monads TS is just a way and a trial transformation that allows us To swap the order of the monads so it goes from ST to TS and this is enough to define a composite monad t alpha s if Alpha satisfies this to Green's conditions So now ideally we would like to be able to construct Cartesian liftings for the composite monad from Cartesian liftings of the individual Monads and therefore from algebras of the individual monads And if like this is possible as long as the algebra satisfy an extra condition So the extra condition is that if we have an algebra in monotone t algebra and in monotone s algebra They induce a Cartesian lifting of the composite monad if and only if These two algebras commute nicely with The distributive law so we have ST omega there's two ways of eliminating s and t one is by first Applying t and then s and everyone is by swapping t and s and then applying first s and then t And if these two paths of the pentagon commute then we can build a Cartesian lifting for the composite monad So now we'll leave behind the more abstract part of the presentation and we look at looking to some examples We start with examples in the category of slices over to where to is asset to point set zero one with the expected order and set slash two Can be seen as simply the category of binary predicates That has a smorphism functions that preserve the truth of the predicates So the first example we look into is a Parcetti monad sometimes called maybe monad that can be used to model non determinism sorry non-termination or errors and There are exactly two in monad on algebras over two Which are taught for totality and part for partiality and This induced two Cartesian liftings and therefore to composable WP transformers But instead of looking at the WP transformers we look into the core triples, which are a bit easier to understand So the whole triple PF Q is Satisfied in the tot setting if for any input in P The output is not an error and it satisfies Q So it's like a total interpretation of the whole triple and the partial interpretation of the whole triple is that if the input satisfies X and The output is not an error then the output satisfies Q But if the output is an error then it does not matter We can also look into the non-empty power set monad That is used to model non-termination So P plus X maps X The non-empty subsets of X and there are also two M E monotone algebras over two So one is must that models must Non-termination and the one is May and those induced two Cartesian liftings that are summarizing the table So the whole triple PF Q satisfy in the May setting if for any input in P There is a possible execution of F such that it its output is in Q And the mass interpretation of the whole triple is that if the input satisfies P then any possible Execution has an output that satisfies Q this example can be also seen in a similar model in the probabilistic setting So we also have two algebras of the distribution monad P must and P may So probabilistic may It interprets The whole triple PFQ as follows. So if X satisfies P Then the output of the program on X satisfies Q with non-zero probability I'm the probabilistic mass interpretation of the whole triple is that if the input satisfies P Then the output needs to specify Q with probability one Now we look into more complex examples of slices were the positive reals So the category sets last as your infinity can be seen as the category that has as objects Revalued predicates and as morphisms as always functions that preserve This triangle laxly So we start by looking again into the distribution monad, but in this case we need to find a real value of algebra And one possible example of this is the expected value Which satisfies a monotonicity conditions And now we are looking to exhaustively into algebras of D We just consider the expected value But the idea is that the expected value allows us to recover a Transformer that is known in the literature as the weakest pre-expectation as introduced by Maccabre and Morgan and the weakest pre-expectation Of a program F and a predicate I Computes the expected value of I over the output distribution of F For some input X. We can also combine effects For instance probabilities and undeterminism This is a well-known problem For this we define the monad idea of index distributions, which is another way of defining a monad of distributions But the point of idea is that it has a distributive law over P Which the does not? And for ID we can also define the monotone I the algebra of expected value And if you combine this expected value with SAP Which is a an algebra of P Then we obtain the WP defined by this equation so if we have a program F with Probabilities and undeterminism and we have a predicate I then the WP of F and I Computes the supreme of the expected values of any possible output And now a final we want to use our techniques to reconstruct the expected runtime transformer That was introduced by Kaminsky and others to reason about runtimes of probabilistic programs So our settings a bit simplified compared to theirs because we don't consider loops but in any case it is that they have a language first-order language With probabilistic assignments non-termistic choice conditionals and also a tick operator to introduce Time into a program and The ERT transformer maps functions between memories and real values to functions between Memories and real values As summarized by this table, I'm going to go quickly through this By the point is that of course it's compositional so ERT of C1 composed with C2 is the composition of ERTs and also they introduce cost for Assignments and for conditionals So now to model this in our setting we need to combine three monads first a monad of cost Which just is a brighter monad that adds a natural valued cost to a program and also the monad of probabilities and determinism as in the previous example And we develop a denotational model of their language so we have a set V of values an object V of values and states Our memories are a map from variables to values and in the semantics of a program as I'm up from memories to T memories and we can reconstruct their Transformer from three algebras So for the cost monad we just use addition as an algebra so we have a natural number and a real number then you can produce a real number by addition And for a ID we use Expected value and for a P we use supreme and now using these three algebras we can construct a WP Which is summarized by this table and that it almost coincides with the ERT transformer. It just needs an extra transformation. So we need to Instrument the code with ticks Because the RT language does not have explicit ticks for assignment and if But once we do this transformation then We can show that for any program C our WP of the accounting transformation of C Coincides exactly with the expected runtime of C. In the paper there's more material that I have not been able to cover So we first study how to generalize our settings to k vibrations where k is a category of pos And the idea here is that if the fibers are not posets or something stronger Then we can get WP transformers that have nicer properties as mid-preservation or continuity We're also looking to how to Dualize some of our results to study strongest post conditions and We should have to compute the WPs induced by generic effects as Introduced by plotkin and power And there's some more examples. We have not been able to cover for time reasons. So for instance one example is to study higher moments of cost in probabilistic programs, which is a transformer present in a paper by Kura and others and We'll just study vibrations that are not domain vibrations some related work that I should mention perhaps the more red band one is the work by Hasuo So in his setting what he studies corresponds in our setting to Cartesian liftings along C slash T omega So our increment with respect to this work is that our object of truth values is not T omega, but in general any omega Some other work is the work by Goncharov and Shreda Where they study predicates by the use of what they call innocent monads As some other work also is the work by Hino and others Where they study predicate transformers using relative monads and finally I should mention the work by my yard and others on their Dijkstra monads Which is it has an intersection with our work that we will discuss in the final version of the paper so now to conclude I have presented a way of characterizing composability of WPs in an effectful setting as pullbacks of Cartesian liftings of monads Also, I have shown techniques of how to construct these Cartesian liftings from algebras of the individual monads and I have shown that algebras of the individual monads can be composed Into algebras of the composite monads and therefore to construct Cartesian liftings for the composite monads And finally I have shown that all these abstract techniques are actually applicable to reconstruct a Transformers that have appeared in the recent literature And with this I would like to conclude the talk and thank everyone that has watched


Please stop eating. I hate it. I can hear it. I can hear you smack your god in my ear. I am a quiet eater. You're basically a walrus. What? If you were to actually get it, I'm Corbin. I'm Rick. And this is his solar flare. Please follow us on Instagram and Twitter. Thank you for watching. On Patreon, I follow my official Twitter account. And today we are doing a movie review. And this film has been requested since millennia. Long time. Long time. Really long time. Because it came out beginning of last year or maybe in 2018, I think. No, it came out because it could have been nominated for international film. Yeah, for the international film. And tons of people wanted it to be. Yeah, and they now are probably saying, see, told you. But obviously it's super deluxe. An unfaithful newlywed wife. An estranged father. A priest. Sounds like a good joke. Walk into a bar. And an angry son suddenly find themselves in the most unexpected predicaments. Each poised to experience their destiny. All on one fateful day. A lot going on. Yep. Obviously, which is what happened in the film. Starring our first VJ Sarapathy film. The huge mega star VJ Sarapathy. Say a couple of these names for me just so we can get them. Fahad Fasil. Samantha Ruth Prabhu. Ramya Krishan. Mishkin Kayathri. And Bhagavathi Perumal. Yeah, obviously this is a huge cast of characters. Obviously because they intertwined it was a very cast driven film. Obviously one person wasn't driving this film. It was just a ton of people. It was a very director driven medium in my opinion. Yeah. Which I was surprised by that. I didn't realize and maybe that's just for my own stupidity. I had thought the film was solely focused on VJ's. Yes. Gotcha. I thought it was just his story. I didn't realize it was basically like four stories happening at the same time. Absolutely. Yeah, which didn't bother me at all. It was just a pleasant surprise. Yeah. What were your initial thoughts Rick? Both really, really positive things to say. And then I have some really, really critique. I had some stuff about this movie that I think is brilliant. And I have stuff about this movie that I really don't like. So there's some of you who are going to be saying you completely agree with me.  So just letting you know in advance. That's my takeaway from it. I have really strong feelings in opposite directions. Okay. We'll talk about it.  Really? Yeah. Everything about it. Almost everything about it. Yeah. We can talk about it. Because here it comes. Watch all the threads in the comments about how I'm different and I'm grumpy now. I think you weren't paying attention.  You're going to miss a lot of why certain things were there and you missed it. If I did, trust me. I'll tell you the things that I don't like about it. I'll explain and I'll tell you what I like about it. But I would like to start with the directing. I love the directing. That is one of my favorite things to talk about with this movie is the director. The director says his name for me. We didn't say his name. A little larger so I can make sure I pronounce it right. And I will butcher it. So forgive me. The origin. Comoraraja. Yeah, that's a tough one. I'm not going to attempt that. I liked his directing a lot. A lot. Because one of my favorite things about the movie. Obviously, you could tell he's a fan of Quentin. Not that he's trying to be Quentin. Great observation. I agree with you. You could tell he loves Quentin.  That's in all sincerity. I don't want to say it's my favorite. It is. I have two things that are unquestionably my favorite things about this film. And one of them is the direction. I thought the direction was fantastic. Yeah. Directing was phenomenal. I loved everything he did. I love the shot, the cinematography in this. Whoever that is, we can say their names. Because man. They're off shot. And P.S. Vinod. It was so freaking... It was not hyper realistic, but it was more beautiful than real life. Which is how Quentin does it. Correct. Exactly. Great observation. And it was quirky without trying to be. You know what I mean? I didn't feel like this was a director trying to let people know what a quirky director I am. I got the feeling that this is just who this director is. And some of the shots were just great. The reason I like being surprised. And so he had a lot of shots that just surprised me. You'd be back behind a door post. And the guy is way down over there. Down over there. And that's where the scene is. But you're hearing different stuff along the sides. I like that a lot. The fact that it's just so... The shots, there's a bunch of people going on it. You're going between that door and that door. But you're all the way over here. And you're not really following them. Sometimes you're following them. Yeah. But it was fairly almost chaotic. Kind of like the story is supposed to be. But it all worked together very, very well. So I really enjoyed that part of it. Very original. Yeah. A lot of philosophical stuff in this that I really enjoyed. Not that I believe at all. It's just that I enjoy what his vision for this was that it's basic. Now, did he also write it? Yes. Yes, he did. Yes. Yeah. Which doesn't surprise me. No. Not at all. And I want to also talk maybe about your second favorite. I'm hoping is VJ Satapathi. Well, you know, my second favorite actually. I can list off my favorite things. I thought that the direction was fantastic and very original. Very different. In fact, if that's another takeaway I have from this is the uniqueness of this film. This is unlike any movie we've seen come out of India. Oh, yeah. Very original. Very, very unique. Very pulp fictiony. Very much.  Correct. But it all comes together in the end. So that uniqueness, I thought the story, what was going on and what was being done premise-wise was, again, the word just kept coming to my mind. This is very unique. This is very original. As far as the acting is concerned, he was the best part of it for me. As far as the acting is concerned from everybody. Well, I thought he did really well. VJ Satapathi. I thought he did really, really well. I didn't recognize him at all. Not at all. Which was fantastic. It was really unique how they did it also. Especially when he was putting on the sorry. That was such an unflattering shot that the director decided to go with. Which was, I thought, a brilliant choice. Great. And I also found it compelling that the work he put into that, because I don't know how to put on a sorry, but it looked like he sure did. And I know those are not easy things to put on. But the girl who had the affair as well, I thought she did very, very well. I can't remember which one she was, though. The one who, by the way, spoilers, if you haven't seen the movie, were about to talk about stuff. All spoilers. Obviously. As usual. The girl who the movie starts off with at the beginning. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Her. Yeah. I liked her a lot. Her performance. Yes, a lot. She did very, very well. Okay. I just, I didn't. Why? What didn't you like about her? I, there were just many, many times I wasn't drawn in to her portrayal of the character. I thought she was pretty flat a lot of the time. Disagree wholeheartedly. Yeah. I think she did very, very well. I think actually, I mean, there weren't like amazing performances by all. I thought as well in terms of like, especially the kid, like the little young boys who were on the whole super bad track with the porn, which is basically, almost they were interacting super bad, which is one of the films they actually asked for at the beginning. They were almost to basically, I don't know if you've seen super bad. I hacked out super, super bad type scenarios as these kids. And I thought it was almost on purpose sometimes, like some of the, the crying in this. That was my biggest, I think it was on purpose. The forced fake sobbing. Yeah. I think it was on purpose. Every single one of them. Yeah. It was not supposed to be real. Also hers wasn't like when she was about to get raped. Oh, no, no, no. Hers wasn't. Yeah. Hers was phenomenal. But no, all those other ones. Yeah. And similar to how you love for some reason the acting and dev dots, but you don't like this. You don't understand. Well, that's a completely different. No, it's not. This is all acting. No, the approach to this is not the same as dev dots. You really think there was a thousand times better acting in this than there wasn't dev dots by everyone. I'm not talking about that. By everyone. You made the comparison to dev dots in terms of the acting. I think at certain points, he made them over, over emphasize the crying. That happens actually a lot in Indian cinema, the overacting crying, but I feel like that was on purpose in this. I think that's open to interpretation unless we hear it straight from the director. But as far as the comparison with dev dots, dev dots was definitively done in a theatrical way that was commiserate to stage acting. The totality of the ensemble stage acting, irrespective of whether you think it's good or bad director specifically articulated that the approach to single cast member in this film was to be umber theatrical like stage. Yeah, but it's still bad acting. Irrespective of it being good or bad, still bad acting. So in dev dots, you have that intentionality articulated by the director for all the world to see whether you like it or not is absolutely an opinion, which is fine. You didn't like it. I liked it. That's fine. This, I don't know that such an approach was done. We have yet to hear if that was the approach the director wanted to take. I did. It was definitively hodgepodge. And if it was, that would help me since it wasn't articulated and it's hodgepodge. And I saw moments where things were supposed to be believable for the majority of the time I felt. I thought that was my biggest thing. I had a really hard time with actors trying to cry who were not Quentin does the exact same thing in his films. He has never been an actor in a Quentin Tarantino film. I can show you. You fake cried so bad. I can show you in Django, my favorite Quentin film. When? When the racist, when they get beat up and they're crying. That is, oh, that digs the exact same style. When the racists get beat up and they're crying. When? When they're attacking him with a dog. Okay. But then after that, they get beat up by Django and then. Not even close to the fakery of the crying in this.  So what else didn't you like? Go ahead. Okay.  When did I ever say I'm destroying this whole film? You didn't like the film, just like you didn't like Under Hunt Hunt because of piano. So that's why I'm asking, what else didn't you like? Okay. Don't say I don't like a film when I haven't said I don't, but it suddenly becomes. You've seen that review. Yeah. And look, I didn't bring up Under Hunt Hunt. I could bring up Under Hunt Hunt because I'm the one that liked it. So go on. What else didn't you like? Okay. I didn't like the thing I disliked the most was the message of the film. Why? What was wrong with the message? The basic bottom line message of this was coming from a almost nihilistic, subjective, relativistic worldview. What part of that didn't you like? That's his message that he wanted to get by. Correct. You don't have to agree with the message. No, but there's this duality that happens when you have a moral to the story. On the one hand, every director and artist and writer has the right to portray whatever they want to portray. And in that regard, I respect this writer and this director for sharing something from his vantage point that I believe he believes wholeheartedly. I really think that there's a message to the film and it's coming from his worldview. On the other hand, I think his worldview is incredibly dangerous. What? What's the worldview? Subjective relativism. What is it? There is no good and bad. It's all perspective. That's not... Okay. That is not the overall message that he was trying to convey. He sums it up at the end in the monologue that's happening in the porn theater by the guy on the movie screen. And one of the things among many he says that underscores this worldview is at the same time on earth, there's sunlight making day and there's evening on the other side. And neither one is good or bad. Hence, there is no good or evil. Things that used to be considered bad are now considered good. Good and bad has no moral absolute. It is purely based on subjective relativism. That is a scary perspective to have as your worldview. Oh, Jesus. He wasn't talking about like terrorism or rape. He's talking because there were these specific things that were happening in here.  Correct. That was once considered a taboo thing, the people in the porn industry. Like he said specifically in the film, people love watching porn but they demonize the person in the film. That was one. Right. Transgenders. Right. Obviously they're supremely discriminated against. And lots of people think they're just bad people and it's inhuman. Right. I know. And that is incorrect. And so it was once taboo and now it's not. Then you can get into other ones in terms of the... The one that you can... The affair is the one that you can get into. Certain people have a view of open relationships. That's their worldview. Don't really care. But that... Oh, I care. Yes. You could care but that doesn't make it ruin the film. Friends who... That is their worldview. And they live happily in relationships because they... Each person has agreed that that's how they think monogamy is not how they want to live their life. They're not enforcing it on you. They're just saying don't judge other people based on what they want. And the whole message of the film wasn't really that. It was that we're all one body and we work together as humans. And it all works together in a machine, basically. And so what happens over here affects what's over here, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And there was a lot of points in that. Like when the one shot, which was a brilliant shot in the film, which was the ants running up the wall. And it shows that humans are supposed to be the superior being. And they were in there griping about... I believe it was either the affair or the transgender woman. And we're over here griping about these minuscule things that shouldn't matter. But these thousands of thousands of ants can work together for the common good. And so that's really the whole point of the film, is to stop judging everyone. And also that's... I agree. Yeah. Based on what foundation for judgment is the point. That yes, don't judge. However, the worldview that's being propagated in the end, it's all tied up in that monologue. Example, porn as an example. The ending of it was, now let's enjoy watching, which has a comedic element to it. But tying that into everything else and giving the tying up his mother's involvement in porn basically was creating this element of if one person over there likes to watch pornography and that person over there doesn't like to watch pornography, that doesn't make pornography bad. For that person, pornography is good. For that person, pornography is bad. I'm here to tell you pornography is bad. It's objective. It's not subjective. You can't. That's one of my least favorite things anybody can do to a film is take your view of something and just be offended by what they said on the screen. It's their message. They're not telling you to do that. This is not the president. This is them telling you their story of what they wanted to convey. Well, I think it's more than them just telling you a particular story that they wanted to convey. I think he like a good, that seems from the direction style and from the screenwriting and like any filmmaker worth their weight is going to have a message. They want to get a message across that's going to create change. You don't think this director wants to create change in society with this film? Yeah. It doesn't mean you need to be offended by it. Why don't I have the right to say I understand you had... You can say that, but it doesn't mean you have to hate the film for it.  Because I can tell. I know you don't like a film. Your intuition of my responses is more accurate than my actual telling you what I think of a film. Yes. Great. I hope you keep that in the reaction. I will. Good. Because what you've just said is your opinion matters more than my truth of what I say. I can tell you don't like the film.  You said a moment ago you destroyed the film. I have mixed feelings about the film. If there's stuff about the film I really thought was brilliant and there's stuff about the film I take great exception to, which is actually... You're taking exception to just not the film itself. You're taking exception to your personal beliefs and that you don't like it. I hate that when people do that to film. So when you watch a film that has violence on dogs, I can get upset with you because you don't like it because it's a personal affront to you. And I can tell you, oh, Corbin, you're missing the point of the film. You're hung up on dogs. I would never get hung up on that. Oh, Corbin, are you that self-deceived that you wouldn't get hung up on a movie where the movie had throughout cruelty to dogs? That wouldn't get you...  No, I'm not a... That's the story they're trying to tell. I don't like it but doesn't mean I hate the film for it. I literally just told you you have the right to have that opinion but not to hate a film for it. Destroying it. I don't think you got the actual message of it. I think I did and I just don't like the message and that's okay. The same thing with the piano. You see something and then the film is kaput because of it. I didn't destroy it.  And please keep this in the reaction. Okay, go, go, Rick. You're not going to interrupt me, right? Can I talk now? Of course you can. It was the interrupting I didn't like. Are you going to stare at me? Are you just going to continue looking over there?  Let's be adults and talk about the film. I would like to do that. Okay, then stare at me, Rick. God, what are you doing? It's not that serious. If someone says I don't like yet food versus I hate that, they have meaning. Words have meaning. There's a reason they have meaning. What did you think about the alien, Rick? I loved the alien. You did? That was one of my favorite things. Why didn't you like the alien over other things? Because it was so original. It was so weird. But that was part of the overall message. I thought that would be a part you didn't like. Why? Just because it was out of the blue. I don't have a problem with things. I love things that are random. Are you kidding me? I love random. Why do you think I like Nacho Libre and Napoleon Dynamite? There's so many random, non-sequitur stuff that just makes no sense. I thought you wouldn't like that one. I found the introduction of the alien was where I started to get really engaged. I enjoyed the alien part because there was a setup for the alien. I don't know if you caught it in the film. Really? Yeah, there was a setup. On the TV, when the family was over, when they were hiding the guy in the fridge. Really? Yeah, on the TV, you could hear it say and it did on the subs. It said, what was it? The aliens? We're not sure if they're still more aliens or if they've all left yet. On the TV. A news anchor said that. Wow. Now did you pick up on that? So you were expecting it or you realized it after they dropped the alien on you? No, my wife watched it with me and she saw that on the screen when it went by. She's like, did they just say there was aliens and they all left? Wow. I was so focused on what they were going to do with the dead body in the refrigerator that I didn't even pick up on it. Yeah, she's good at picking up stuff. But yeah, the alien, but I thought it was really unique because one, it went with the overall message of, I like that it didn't explain the alien. Me too, because it wasn't like the story came out of like, they didn't have to explain like where this person alien came from. They were just like, aliens are among us. Right. I love that. Out of nowhere. Just so you know that the aliens are among us. Also, don't judge them as well. Or the clones. Yeah, don't judge the clones either. So it's basically an overall message of you don't know what's going on and there's aliens just letting you know that there's aliens. Here's something. I didn't think there was a funny, rocky whore. I thought there was a rocky whore tie in almost.  Right. They all want to have sex. Right. All the time. All the time. I thought this director saw Rocky whore. Yeah, that's a good point. That's a very good point. And here's something as far as his portrayal, VG's portrayal in that character. Did you, first of all... Of the alien? No, no, no, no. I'm switching over to something you said that triggered me to that. I found, yes, like any portrayal, very hard to watch some of those scenes where he, when he's being called it. Yeah.  Some of my favorite scenes. The inspector scenes were just brutal. As was, oh my goodness, can I just tell you, this is, I just, when, I laughed out loud when the guy died from the TV hitting him in the head. Oh yeah. I thought that was phenomenal writing a director. I thought it was a brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, great title. Everybody. And I knew it would hit him, obviously. But I then wanted her to leave. Oh, nothing. And keep him handcuffed to the car. Oh yeah. I was like, why are you staying with him?  She probably felt bad also because she did cheat on him multiple times. Maybe that's a justification for it. I think, because they're both pretty terrible people. That's true. I think that's why. That's a justification. One thing if she was like, he cheated on her and she was basically letting her, she felt bad. But I think since she was basically the one that cheated on him, apparently a lot of times. I think it was his intention. Even if it was, it worked.  Is this creepy cop going to do this to this poor girl? And I agree with you. When I was disengaged with her was when she was in the car and he was fake crying. Although I did really enjoy it. I was engaged with her in that moment. I did really enjoy his acting scene though. Who's when they're in the car and she said pretend to act. When she said pretend I'm one of your friends. I thought it was hilarious when he was just talking. They didn't even laugh. I thoroughly enjoyed a lot of this because of how dark comedy a lot of it was. It was a lot of scenarios similar to Quentin's scenarios where these are scenarios you probably shouldn't be laughing at. But you are. Yes. Which is something I really, really enjoy. I also ridiculously enjoyed all of the Star Wars references in this film. And I have a question for you now in light of this and in light of what we know the Oscars have done. We've seen Dully Boy. We've seen Super Deluxe which pretty much that's been the argument the whole time from everybody. When Dully Boy was the choice the Super Deluxe people were like screaming. Now that you've seen both which of the two would you have chosen for the submission? Obviously we know that Dully Boy has not been chosen. It's not on the short list. Correct. And if you didn't know that the short list Oscars released Dully Boy is not going to be nominated. Yeah. Obviously this one. My answer is going to surprise you. Obviously this one I think has more artistic merit in terms of how well it was done. Did you hear I just said agreed? Yeah I did. But I still think our views of why Dully Boy was nominated was the correct choice. It is the correct and that's based on our understanding of the way the politics work with the academy. I still think they made a mistake. With the academy. Agreed. But taking what we know about the politics aside. Let's say you and I are academy members and we're looking at what India is presenting to us and we've watched these two films and we have to select one of these two films as the submission for India. Of the two based on the artistic merits. Which of the two would you select? Irrespective of name attachment, irrespective of petitioning, drawing attention to box office. Pure artistic merit. Which of the two would you choose and select? Super Dully Boy. As would I. Yeah. I mean it has more. I would much prefer Dully Boy. A hundred times out of a hundred you say you want to pick Dully Boy or Super Deluxe. I'm watching Dully Boy. Depends on my mood. Yeah. For me it's pretty much all the time. Yeah. However, I recognize as much as I didn't like some of the acting especially the savan. Which if it turns out that was an intentionality and I just missed that I'm open to being corrected. Like I was obviously with Ranbir. I came in with a presupposition at Ranbir and Barfi and I've watched it three or four times and now realize I was completely wrong with that. And as much as I don't like what I believe is the moral message of the film. What I appreciate. I feel this way with Quinton a lot. Because there's a lot of stuff that Quinton talked Quinton himself. I'm not a big Quinton fan personally. I like these one of my favorites. Yeah. I know.  There's a lot of things I've heard Quinton said. I'm like wow.  Oh he is. Yeah. And again going back to Sasha Baron Cohen. I have great respect for people whose artistry is one that I personally find repugnant or dislike. But I recognize that that was for me. It's the writing and the directing for this. It's so original. It's so outside the box. I feel like this was done in a way where the director and the writer was saying I have a message I want to say and I want to say it this way and I don't care what anybody thinks about it. Hats off to you for that. That is an artist. Yeah. And I think I heard something about the director that this is maybe his like second film. And I think this would have had potentially, I don't know. It's really interesting to see. I'd love to talk to Academy members who have seen Super Deluxe and if they would say the same thing. I think they might. I think they might. This is his second directorial debut.  He's directed and wrote one thing in 10 and then he was a writer, writer, special thanks, lyrics and then he directed Super Deluxe and yeah. Wow. It's quite impressive. The fact that it's only a second film. Yeah. Because there's a level of art. There's a level of maturity in the world. Also, there was a bond obviously we didn't talk about but like I loved all the. And yes, ultimately I didn't like the punches that he took at politics, religion, just people in general. Like the fact that you know this got this the father of the kid who stabbed himself which was great.  I thought he was going to kill his mom. I thought he was going to kill his mom too. I was like holy cow. Yeah. But the priest guy who I think was against, he was denying it and then he kept praying and praying and nothing, nothing happened. Yeah. The one who was saved from the tsunami. And he finally destroyed it and then he got what he was looking for. So after he destroyed it so obviously but then the wife said, she's like I don't believe in God but I was praying and you came with the diamond. So what does that mean? Right.  That his whole thing about you don't know what's going on. Almost nobody does. Yes. Basically it was it reminds me everything on its head. It reminds me a little bit. This is going to be a strange comparison potentially but one of my favorite things about PK was the way that PK so innocently is looking at what are the apparent contradictions and people just believing something just because they believe it without substantiations and he did that in an extremely intelligent way and that's one of the things I did like about the script was his presenting something of oh really so therefore you believe that's true just because it agrees with your presupposition about your experience which is an interesting almost contradiction.  That's where I draw the line. And it's a disagreement. We can agree to disagree. I believe in objective reality irrespective of subjective perception. I don't believe this artist thinks that he's entitled to that. I don't resonate with that I'm with you you know we basically believe the exact same thing but it doesn't bother me that I have to watch something that I don't agree with. The reason it bothers me is because for me I know that this has that's the power of film. Film has the power to shape minds in ways no other medium has and this has the capacity to take people down a path of subjective relativism which is a dangerous place to go when you meet head-on objective reality. I don't. I don't agree films do that. Oh they do. We don't have to get into that. Art can change the world. Oh I agree. But also I don't blame films for what people do. Not blaming the film people have personal responsibility but there is a level of contribution that's powerfully shaping in the mind of people that leads them to their behaviors when they live in a world that isn't helping shape them in the direction that would be healthy. I really do. Hence like porn is bad period. That's a note you want to end on? No. If we're if we're ending on a note people have commented on this before is they like how you and I in one reaction will go head-to-head and be really pissed off with each other. You guys haven't seen the Oscars yet.  But I know. But we always end back up into a place of porn is bad.


Okay, all right. So good morning once again. Glad that all of you all can be here. Yeah, I'm here live with the students over here. It's lovely to see all of them here. All right, so we'll get started. Let's just start with a word of prayer and we'll move right into class. Heavenly Father, we thank You, Lord, for Your grace and for Your love over us. Thank you that, Lord, You have shown us Your love, Lord, through so many ways. Thank you that we are here this morning once again to look back at the institution of marriage that You created. Father, even as we look at an important aspect of marriage, we pray that You will open our hearts. You will correct our ways. You will align us, Lord, to Your Word. Heal our hearts. We pray, God, even as we relate with others, Lord, that we will show the love and the glory of God to those around. We ask all this in Jesus' name. Amen. All right, so maybe just a quick recap of what we did the last week before we move ahead. So any of you would just like to share what we did last week. What is one of the chapters that we did last week? So either the students here or anyone online could just share. We learned to live out of, I mean to live Christ-like and through knowing our identity in Christ in order to live Christ-like as well. And also to walk in the spirit. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Ren. Anybody else? Anything else that stood out for you, specifically on what we learned? Even the online students could share what you found was relevant, what was important. Radha? You also learned about the renewing of the mind. Okay, yes, we spoke about how we... Go ahead, Jaiken. Constantly meditating God's Word and that meditating helps us to speak peace to our situations. So otherwise we get into other like our own flesh and then cannot be joyful. Constant renewing of that was very helpful. Okay, nice. Thank you. Thank you so much. All right. So today we're going to be looking at... Till chapter 5, what we've done, we specifically looked at building... At having a basis for marriage, how God designed marriage. So today we're going to be looking at certain elements in marriage. What are important aspects or elements that we need to focus on in marriage? And we're going to be looking around four or five of those important elements. And one of that is communication. So when we look at communication, it's an essential aspect of building a strong relationship. Without communicating, can we have a relationship? No. You need to communicate. You need to listen. You need to hear. You need to be able to address your thoughts and your ideas and be able to listen to other people's thoughts and ideas. So that's what really builds a marriage. So when we're looking at marriage in itself, we're looking at communication as a building block of marriage. Now, a certain aspect of communication. We have different styles of communication. We all communicate differently. So there may be some people who are able to express just their thoughts. Or some are able to express their feelings. Or some may be able to express just factual data or details. So we're going to be looking at what is really important in marriage. For that, let's look at different levels of communication. So the first one that you're looking at is a casual sense of communication. Who would you have a casual communication with? A casual communication generally happens with people you just know as acquaintances. Like your milkman, like your shopkeeper. So what are you going to do? You're just saying, hi, Baisabh, how are you? I want one liter of milk. You pay the money and you come out. Or someone may be helping your house, you're saying. Just clean the house over here, there. The dishes need to be washed. This is how much of food that you need to make. It's a very casual communication, is that right? So what we're doing there is we're not really sharing too much. We're sharing very, very little. It's a sad thing that unfortunately there are a lot of marriages that are like that. It's just factual, it's just transactional. You just say what you need to do. It's a very casual conversation. I'm going for work, pick up the children at 10 o'clock. The dog needs to be fed. We have to go to church at 10 o'clock when we come back, right? And that is a really sad state of affairs of communication that happens. What's the next level of communication? It's what we call as a professional communication. So in a professional communication, your communication is sharing a lot more of things. You're sharing a lot more of ideas. You're sharing a lot more of thoughts. It's probably a task that you need to do, that you're talking about that task in a greater way. So it's about facts, it's ideas, it's thoughts, or it's certain decisions that you may need to make. So professional communication in marriage may sound something like, which school do we put the children in? So you're actually going to find out details of that and then looking at the schools. Or maybe, which house are we going to buy? What are the things that we need to buy? So there's a lot of ideas that's sharing, but then that stops at that. The next comes is friendship. Now in friendship is where you go to a much deeper level of communication. There is a sharing of ideas, there's a sharing of thoughts, there's a sharing of feelings. You're deliberating certain things together. So there is also a freedom there. Freedom to be able to share your own beliefs, share your own thoughts, your dreams. And at certain points of time there's also people are able to correct one another through that. So it's more of a friendship that you build. The most ideal kind of communication for marriage is what we say is an intimate level of communication. So what's the difference between intimate communication and friendship? What do you all think is a difference between intimate and friendship? Even the online students, you could also feel free to talk. What's the difference between intimate and friendship? Intimate level of communication and friendship. Okay. When it comes to friendship conversations, we'll wait for that person to come and share to us. We'll respect their boundaries, but when it comes to intimate, I feel like we take that initiative, just go a little bit higher, like more step than friendship. One step higher than friendship. Okay, wonderful. So one of the difference, Prince, do you have anything to say? No. What do you think is the difference between intimate and friendship? I guess what Prince Brothers said, what Prince Brothers said, one step straight forward. It means from my perspective, main thing is in friendship we will share something, but in intimate friendship coming to, that person knows most of the secret of us. There is a way of intimate friendship, and if we are intimate friend of that person, we know what is the secret of him or herself. Most of the other people don't know that two people know. Okay. They see everything. Okay, they see everything. So one of the biggest difference in intimate communication is the fact that you can share and be vulnerable. That is you can absolutely be honest and open about whatever you're feeling, whatever you're thinking, whatever your ideas are, you can be absolutely free without that fear of judgment, without the fear that someone will say, you can't think like this or you shouldn't be feeling like this. It's that openness that you have.  Okay, and in marriage, that's what is the most ideal level of communication that you're looking at, where you are sharing everything of who you are and what you're thinking, what you're feeling and what you hope for, what you dream for, is what you would do in an intimate communication. Now that's something that, how does communication work? Does it happen just like that? It happens over time. It happens, the more and more you communicate, it's more and more that you build that level of intimacy. So when you're looking at a, let's say a friend that you know, you would have initially just met with each other and spoken about their names and their whereabouts, where they come from, right? And slowly you're talking about your ideas, your thoughts, and you're talking about certain of your feelings and then you get into a lot more of vulnerability. And marriage is important for marriage to come to that place of intimacy is what is needed. Unfortunately, we do see a lot of marriages staying at the professional, a casual level, but it is to grow in intimacy so that it builds marriage in itself. Now, these principles that we were talking about, although it is a lot to do with the husband and wife, you can think of it even in the way that you deal with your children. Okay, in parents to children is where you can build intimacy. Okay, now for, in order that we have a meaningful communication, there are three important things, aspects of communication that we need to look at. So which is time, trust, and transparency. So we look at each of this a little bit more in detail. So for a communication to be meaningful, you need to spend time, you need to feel a sense of trust and you need to have the sense of openness or transparency in order to build that communication to that intimate level. Okay, so let's look at time. So in marriage, it's extremely important to set aside time in a day, you know, in a day is absolutely wonderful, but if not, at least in one or two or three days, we're setting aside time where you're able to communicate and talk with each other. Okay, so what are you doing in that point of the time? So you may be just, it can be something that you're not doing together.  It also needs to be at a time when you have the energy. So often what happens especially when, you know, when we're different, there may be some people who are early morning risers, some who are who sleep late. So you cannot set a time of communication in these two times because one of them will be sleeping. So you set a time that is most useful where both members of the marriage are able to engage in a meaningful and a way that builds that communication. Now, this is something that needs to be done intentionally because as we all know life is busy so we're all running from pillar to post and if you don't set aside time, it doesn't happen. Even for some of you who may be in Bible college who aren't married just to be able to see your friend is something you'll have to call up and say, hey, let's meet up together and let's have a coffee together. It's an intentional time and so also in marriage. It just doesn't happen. It doesn't happen automatically.  Are you all with me? When you're having that time together often the time that we're together sometimes goes in looking at important things that need to be done. The to-do list maybe it's you know how much of the bills are paid whether the children's meetings, school meetings have been gone through, are there purchases that's made? That's all professional talk, right? But to keep aside that professional talk and spend some time to be able to discuss and look at more intimate levels of communication and also it's healthy to also plan longer periods of time. When you're taking a vacation taking two, three days off just to be able to spend that time with one another. So that's what we're looking at when we're saying time. So this meaningful and healthy communication that's that requires time, that requires intention, that requires effort, okay? All right, next one is trust. Okay, what is when you're saying how do you build somebody's trust? How do you think you build somebody's trust? Okay, even the online students can answer how do you build somebody's trust or how do you build trust? So maybe they might give you responsibility or something to do and you do it really well, then maybe the trust grows minimally. Okay, all right. Okay, so when someone does something that you give them, a task that you give them, a responsibility they do it faithfully. Okay, so that's how you earn somebody's trust, okay? How how do you give trust to someone? How do you give trust to someone?  All right. How else do you give trust? Okay. Okay, by being faithful or just being that present. Okay. All right, now in a marriage relationship trust needs to be earned and it also needs to be given. So what is earned? Trust being earned is that you're doing things in such a way that someone can depend on you and trust on you, trust you. Okay, and giving trust is where you are being dependable when you are there to do something for others. So that's so in a marriage relationship that's important to be able to earn your trust, earn trust as well as to give trust. Now learning to trust another person is you are telling them that or you're helping them gain confidence about who you are and what you say you will do. Okay, you're helping them gain confidence and that ability or that assurance that they have that if I have done or said or given something to this person they will do it. Okay, so that's what earning trust is. You also giving trust when you are keeping your end of your promise. So keeping your end of the bargain right and ensuring that whatever you've said you're also doing. So that's important to do. Can a marriage be effectively built if there is no trust? No. Okay, so what are some situations that you all have come across where trust is broken in a marriage? Okay, rather says when people hide something. Okay, hide important information. Yes, trust gets broken. What are other situations where trust gets broken? Okay, talking behind their back. So you're saying something about them to others without them knowing. Maybe an information. Okay. Alright, anything else? Okay, so some personal information that is made public. Excellent, wonderful. Chira says when people lie again and again. Okay, any other situations where trust is lost? Okay, guarded. You say guarded. You're not giving right information or okay. Alright, someone says insult. Okay, when there is insecurity about each other. Okay, Nina says insult. What about infidelity? That is when they're in either some kind of extra marital affair. Does trust break there? Yeah, yeah. That's right. Infidelity is when when you're moving away from your marriage and having a relationship with somebody else outside of marriage. That's what infidelity is. Also when when personal things are shared. Maybe, you know, let's say the husband and wife are having a fight and the wife or the husband takes this personal information to somebody else like to friends. Right? That will break trust? No? Without for example they're having, maybe they had a huge fight at home. Alright, and probably there was some exchange of words and maybe there was some personal things that were shared and this personal things is taken out from the two sims to the parents. Is that a betrayal of trust? It can be a betrayal of trust. Because what should have been sorted there is going to the parents without maybe the permission of the other spouse. That can also become an issue of trust. Without trust a marriage cannot work. A marriage doesn't work well. So it is important that husband and wife need to be able to trust each other. Not just with the information that they share but also with any kind of content, right? Even with the character, even the way that they bring about their character is what you may need to have trust. So there must be trust that what is shared stays in confidence within the marriage. Okay? There must also be trust that whatever you're sharing, I'm sure you all would have probably come across this in some relationship or the other that you've shared something very personal to a friend. But that personal information, like I think he said has been made public. Right? And that can be very, very betraying. So even in marriage, what is personally shared you go and take it to either your parents or your in-laws that could also be a break of trust. Or when you're bringing back this personal information in between a conflict. Right? So maybe in your vulnerability, you've probably said something to your spouse and when he or she is angry, he brings it. Anyway, you're like this.  And so when you bring out that kind of information during a fight, that can also break a lot of trust. And there are barriers in communication. Okay? What about transparency? Transparency is something where you're able to really share your innermost thoughts and your feelings your dreams. And that also takes time to build. It's not something that happens quickly. It happens with time. It happens with trust. And as a result there is transparency. Okay? Now if you look at page 70 that's what's in the in the digital books. But for those of you who have books, it's 73. Okay? So if you look at page 73 there is a small table that shows how good you are at communication.  Because it gives you a good idea of how you are in your communication. Okay? So it's a scale. One is never. Two is sometimes. Three is often. Four is most often. Five is always true. So rate what you feel about your communication between you and your spouse if you're married. If you're not married it's okay between you and a friend. Okay? Because the way that you communicate to a very good friend is probably the way that you're going to communicate to your spouse also. Okay? So spend two, three minutes to quickly do that. It'll help you to understand. Okay? So anybody would like to share something that is evident to them that they have to work on any one of those that you may need to work on. E-learning, sorry. Online students. Anything that you saw in those items that you feel you must work on students here. I would say the third one to express. Feel free to express yourself. Okay. All right. So this is a good it's like a check to show you how good you are at your communication. Okay? Because if you do find that your score it's a good thing to start working on it right away. Don't wait till you're married. Okay? For those of you who are not married here. Okay. So what does communication do and how does communication build a good marriage? And let's just look at a few things as to what communication means and how it helps marriage in several ways. Okay? One of the things that communication does is it helps you to know and understand each other. Right? So you're actually talking about different things and it's only when you talk that you understand. Right? For example, recently we just had our marriage conference and there were certain things that you know we were talking, my husband and I were talking at part of the thing and it was something that we've never spoken about. Right? It made it was a very refreshing time just to talk about something that meant a lot to us and it really helped us understand what we liked or what kind of people we are. So it helps you know and understand each other. Communication can help you to work together as a team. Okay? And how does that happen? How does it help you to work as a team? Think of think of let's say a husband and wife stands in the kitchen and does, makes a meal. Do you need to communicate? Yes. Otherwise your biryani will have too much of salt or it will have maybe sugar instead. Right? So unless you communicate, hey I've done this part of it, this needs to be done or it needs to be done like this so it needs, so I've just taken a very simple example of maybe cooking but in the greater things of life also you need to work together as a team. You need communication to work as a team. Okay. Communication is needed because it helps you to support one another. It helps you to support each other. Right? At times of illness, times of hardships, times of conflicts, times of stress you're there supporting and encouraging each other. Right? How do you support and encourage somebody? What do you, what words do you use? Okay? Saying something positive about them okay? Say, hey I believe in you, you can do this. It's not a big thing. Come on, I'm there with you. Right? So that's, she always does that. Okay. Alright.  Say, I trust you can do it.  We'll figure it out. So that's how you support and encourage each other. Okay? You also communication is very important to resolve conflicts. Right? And this is something that we're going to be looking at next next to next class about how do we resolve conflicts and how communication is important without communication you may not be able to iron out problems. Right? Especially if there are so so let's say, you know you're newly married and your spouse has made a breakfast for you. Okay?  Right? And that's it. You're not saying anything more. If you don't communicate that I don't know, those are, Idli has a bad effect on your stomach. What would happen? What would your spouse think? It would take it very personally. Yeah? Right? They'll say, okay, they don't like cooking. He doesn't like me. She doesn't like me. Didn't want to get mad at me. I mean, you can go into so many different things. Right? So you resolve issues by communicating, by actually sharing where you're at, what your preferences are, what is your perspectives, what your opinion is and the more that you share, you're building a better working together. So when conflicts arise communication is something that helps you work through certain differences. Okay? Because a lot of misunderstanding happens in conflicts because we don't communicate. Right? A lot of misunderstandings happen. Probably maybe I bring about an example to make that clearer. You know especially when we make decisions. Let's say you're making a decision about wanting to buy a vehicle and one person wants to buy a two-wheeler, the other wants to buy a four-wheeler. Right? And if you just stand on that and say, I want a two-wheeler, I want a four-wheeler without actually talking about the reasons why you think a two-wheeler is needed or a four-wheeler is needed, you're not really understanding where they're coming from. Okay? So the person with a two-wheeler will say, it's easiest to get on the road with that because traffic in Bangalore, that's probably the easiest thing. But the person who wants the car will say, no, you know, I've fallen ten times on a scooter and I'm really fearful about that. I want a car. I like a car because it makes me feel safe. So it's just communicating, right? And so a lot of this builds understanding, it also helps to resolve conflicts. The other thing that it does is it helps you to grow spiritually together. So communication is where you're able to, you know, share or discuss what you have learned, what you're reading, what God's telling you, you know, what's putting inside your heart, it happens only through communication. So you grow together, you build each other's faith, you build each other, you nurture one another in spiritual encouragement. Okay? That's also a way to communicate. So communication is important because it helps to protect your marriage. What happens to a marriage that has no communication? It's a dead marriage. Right? Is it a dead marriage? Because in marriage you would like to share your thoughts, your feelings, your love, your affection to one another. And if you don't do that, what happens? It's a temptation to wander off into some other kind of an entanglement and other kind of a companionship. Right? So keeping your communication open and strong helps you to protect your marriage. Okay? Next one is to build up and bring up children. So how parents communicate will really the way a husband and wife communicates has an impact on the way that the children grow up and the children learn. Right? So if you go, if you look back at your own homes, okay, think of the way that your parents communicated when there was a conflict. So I'm sure all of you know how. I don't want to, I don't want to bring that up but you'll know how.  For example, if you've had a home where parents whenever they've had conflicts they actually, you know, move back into the room and they talk about it and then they come. Right? So you know okay, something's happening there. They talk about their issues. Or you may have come from a home where parents are yelling and shouting at each other, bringing you in the midst of it and then you begin to see you know, you kind of have an impact so I never want to get married because because conflict is all about people yelling and shouting. So it has an impact. Right? So it matters that we are able to build that open communication. It's also important because it helps you to cherish memories. I'm sure when you all are all sitting together here you'll talk about your school days or you'll talk about your childhood. No, you wouldn't do that. Nobody does that. Don't have the time for it.  Yeah, or we went for this trip and this is what you tried. So what that is cherishing memories. So when you communicate, you're actually cherishing one another, you're reliving those memories that actually help you. Okay? All right. Any questions before we move on? As we are discussing about communication and when it comes to these resolving issues. So like what, how do you communicate? Like if there's some issue happen and if the other person like not only in marriage but even with friendship. If that other person got angry or if they get offended and they just walk out and as we're trying to approach and talk to communicate, but if they're not willing to talk, so how we can resolve and how we can communicate in that situation. Okay, very good question. The question mainly is when there is a struggle with a conflict with someone, if the other person is not willing to talk, how do you resolve communication? Okay. So the first and foremost thing is when there is a conflict we'll again look at it later, but when there is a conflict what is the biggest emotion that happens? Hurt or anger maybe, right? So hurt or anger is what generally rises up when you're in a conflict. Now because we all have different ways of dealing with conflicts sometimes when people are hurt or anger they react differently. So this is something we learned you either react like a rhinoceros what is a rhinoceros? You know what rhinos are, right? They head on right?  Okay, some people react like a rhinoceros or some people react like a hedgehog. You know what a hedgehog or a porcupine and what it withdraws but what happens it's got those prickly spikes and you go touch it, it'll release one, it shoots one and that will really hurt. Okay, so that's how we may respond in either two ways. Either we are very, very aggressive and straight or we withdraw. Correct? These are generally the two ways. Now these are just patterns of how people deal with conflicts. Now suppose you are dealing with someone who's a porcupine or who's a hedgehog but draw, right? And you may be one like a rhinoceros who wants to iron out things then and there. So first and foremost is to understand that maybe people don't react to conflicts the same way that you do. And so when you know that there is a porcupine there you know that you have to give them time to cool off. Right? You may need to give them time. They may not be willing to talk to you openly like already. So giving them the time and space to cool off and that's how you understand them and say okay I understand that you are in that space like that and I want to give you that space and time. So after giving them that space and time inviting them say hey you know I really want to sort this issue out with you. I want to invite you for a conversation. Okay? Now you may say even then they don't want to. Okay, so and if you look at it a lot of us do that. A lot of us try and sweep our problems and conflicts under the carpet and say never mind let's not talk about it. But it is a healthy pattern to talk about issues. So not all people may be ready and you are right about it. But you've done your part to invite them for a conversation saying you know I really want to sort this out with you. I want to ensure that we are okay with this and I want to talk about it. But there's nothing you can do if they refuse. Right? And you say I respect what everything, but let me tell you hey you know whenever you want to talk about it I'm ready for it or if you think I've done something to hurt you I apologize and I would like to share it. So that's the best that you can do. You can't make them sit and talk to you. Okay? Alright any other questions? Is there how we react? Is there also like from our side have to work on how we react? Like if we are our reaction is like Rhinoso. Do we have to work on ourselves or we are the other time still we have to work on ourselves? Yeah. So is it needed? Yes. So that's what we're going to be talking about. So being a rhino and a hedgehog it's good to understand but both spectrums or both, what do you say? Both kinds are not always very healthy because when you are a rhino you're either yelling, screaming, saying things that are hurtful okay? Or if you are a hedgehog you're not saying anything. You're giving the other person the silent treatment. So these are things you need to work on and that's what we're going to look at. Okay? Alright. Now in communication there are three I'd like to place three aspects to it. There are many two just written here but I just want to bring up the third one here. Okay? There are three aspects to it. There is a listening okay? There is an expression or a talking and there is what we called a feedback. Okay? So there is a listening there is an expression or a talking or a speaking and there is a feedback.  What does it mean? To listen more and talk less. Right? Especially in conversations it is to listen more and talk less. Okay? So in listening the goal, what is the goal? We always have to ask ourselves when we're listening what is the goal? Is it to understand or is it to listen to understand or listen to answer? It's listen to understand. Okay? When we're listening to answer then it becomes it doesn't become a conversation. It becomes a debate. It becomes a fight. But when you are trying to resolve conflicts you're listening to understand and not listening to answer. Okay? So if you look at Proverbs 18 13 it says listen before you answer.  So it's a very direct you know word that's been given. So listen listening is important. So when you're listening what are you trying to do? There's a difference between listening and hearing. Okay? Listening is you're listening to understand. Hearing is you hear something and then it goes out. Actually a lot of things you hear you don't remember. Right? It's what you listen to and understand is what actually stays retained. So when you're listening you are attempting to understand. So what are some of the skills that's needed when you're listening? Okay? So one of the and there are a couple of things over here. It is one is to be attentive. What does being attentive mean? Being attentive is you are actually paying undivided attention to the person. Sometimes you probably know that people look like they're listening but they're actually not listening. Right? And especially when they have those glassy eyes and or they've gone off somewhere else. No, that's true, right? Some people know what I'm talking about here. Okay? So being paying attention is just not keeping your phone or your pens or whatever you're doing down but it's also paying constant attention to the other person. Okay? You know one way how I know people are listening I quickly ask what did I just say and then you know they don't know then I know okay they haven't listened. Would you like to listen once again? Okay? So being attentive, okay? Pay attention without and in marriage often there are things that come in the midst, in our midst that is either our phones our laptops, our work, our children business a lot of things that come. So good listening is when you're actually paying undivided attention. The next thing is to being open. What does open mean? Is that we're not jumping to conclusions even before something is said? Right? So jumping to conclusions is even before 2, 3 the whole sentence is over we've said no this is how you are. Right? That we're jumping to conclusions out coming to the outcome of what it is. So it is yes you're telling yourself okay I will listen to the whole thing and one exercise that I do between couples is I give them like a paper or a book and say okay when you are talking the person who has the book has the permission to talk. Only once you finish do you give it to the other person and then they talk. So you can't interrupt in between. Okay? So that's being open. Being patient listening without interruptions without coming in between and say no no no but no that's not how it is but that's interruptions. So waiting till they have finished that. Next is be clear of what was said. Sometimes what we say we ourselves don't have clarity of what we're saying and we get our clarity when we are talking. Right? And so when you understand that it's good it's good to trace back and say hey this is what I was trying to communicate. So being clear of what is said. So you either summarize you repeat so that you can be understood. Then being responsive. So when you're listening what are you doing?  What is being sensitive? Now I may be talking to you and I'm saying you know I'm very very happy today. Do you see the happiness on my face? You don't right? So you're sensitive to the body language and you can ask you can say you know you say you're happy but then your face doesn't show. Right? Really? Yeah right? So being sensitive to body language. So somebody may be saying like especially in you know between couples when there is a conflict happening the husband will ask the wife what's wrong? Nothing. From that itself you know that there is something wrong right? So listen a lot more. Not just to the words but also to the body language okay? So I can take some time and do that exercise and listening skills questionnaire to really find out how well a listener you are okay? You can do it at your time and at your pace and so that you understand how good a listener you are okay? Great. At the end of one hour let's stop for a break and resume in 10 minutes.


Alright Brad here with backward chaining and not just because I'm backwards. It's one of my favorite procedures It's where a teacher instructs a learner through the entire process of doing something and the student does the last step to meet reinforcement so I One of the biggest things we do in the field is teaching kid how to tie his shoes You do all of the steps to tie shoes Get nice get it to the point of doing a nice little bow Keto grabs two ends of the bow boom the shoes on and he successfully completed the task of putting his shoes on That's one of my favorite examples in recent experience, I taught an entire backward chain of shoe tying and Met with great success The problem is is I never thought that in a task analysis being able to untie your shoe is important I actually caused behavioral issues because I forgot to put untie a shoe in the program So make sure you have the entire process done