COMUNICAÇÃO NÃO-VIOLENTA com abordagem filosófica, baseada no livro de Marshall Rosenberg

Hello, welcome to our talk today, where we will talk about this important topic for us, which is the communication and understanding of other human beings. In this talk, our goal is to answer the following questions. What are our main blockages in communicating with others, in understanding others, and how can we act on them, so that we can have a much higher degree of understanding than we currently have?

So, so that we can continue in this meeting, I will use a book written by the psychologist Marshall Rosenberg, which is Nonviolent Communication, as the title of our talk. And so that everyone can have a general view of what Nonviolent Communication is about, it is a type of process in language that aims to arouse greater compassion among people. That is, the goal is not to convince others through language, impose my point of view in a way that others can understand.

No, it is simply a way of relationship, a way of language in the relationship, in which each one can understand the others more. This, for us, from a philosophical point of view, is something very important. I will explain a little more to you throughout this talk, because for us, philosophically, understanding others is something that will help us walk towards ourselves, towards our own wisdom.

Well, a very interesting analogy that Marshall makes in the book Nonviolent Communication, which I wanted to start commenting on with you, is that he tells a story for us, to make this analogy of what this type of communication proposes. He tells a story that is like a drunk man on the street, who is under a pole, where it is well lit at night, so he is under the pole, on the floor, as if he were looking for something. And then, a policeman comes up to him, seeing what is happening, and asks him what happened, how can he help, what is he looking for?

And the drunk man says to him, I lost the key to my house, and I'm looking for it here. And then the policeman says, well, but you lost it here, in this place. And then the drunk man comments, no, but it's because here it is more lit.

I lost it, actually, it's somewhere else, but since it's more lit here, it's easier to find. Well, this story shows exactly what we do in communication. Just like the drunk man who looks for his key, where he will never be able to find it, we also, in our communication with others, in our relationship with others, we usually look for what we want, where we will never have the possibility to find it.

What we all want in communication is this possibility of understanding others, and being understood too. But we are looking, putting the light of our consciousness in people's aspects, in communication aspects, that will never give us this possibility. These factors are the ones that Marshall will call, in his book, the alienating communication of life, unlike non-violent communication, which would be the communication that increases life through our relationships.

So, this element is very interesting. And before we get into what these factors would be that block communication, the very alienating communication of life, I would like to, before that, comment a little with you, because for us, from a philosophical point of view, this understanding of human beings is so important. That is, for us, it is not that this ability to understand each other is important, it is special, just to avoid conflicts.

Also, we can say that most of the conflicts we live are due to this, this inability to understand each other. But it's not just for that aspect. In fact, from this philosophical point of view, we can say that the understanding of others, the more I am able to understand other human beings, other people, this also increases my ability to wisdom.

That is, the more points of view of others we understand, the more we are walking towards evolution. There is a very special, very beautiful article by Siri Han, which speaks precisely about this. The article is called The Point of View of the Other.

And I know we have this way of thinking, this habit of thinking, that when I see a person who has a different point of view from mine, it's as if we considered that person almost an enemy of ours. That is, I think in one way, she thinks in another way, totally different from me. So it's as if understanding her point of view was denying mine.

So, as I have my point of view and I want to reaffirm it, this person is my enemy. And so all our conflicts, misunderstandings between people begin, and in general, our lack of understanding of each other. But something very beautiful, very special, that I wanted to share with you, so we can have a tonic of this importance of understanding each other, is that what Siri Han comments on this article called The Point of View of the Other, is that precisely in the understanding of people, from the point of view of others, is that it can reveal to me hidden aspects of life.

And so, the more points of view I understand, the deeper my relationship with life will be, the deeper my vision of life will be. So it's a very different point of view from what we're used to thinking, when we see a person who thinks differently, who acts differently, or often has different values from ours. But this element that Siri Han is putting here is very deep and very liberating, at the same time for us.

Imagine, I'll show you an image here to facilitate our understanding of what he's commenting on. Imagine that this line that is drawn is a reality, a truth about something, an idea. Justice, for example, fraternity, for example, is all the truth that exists about a certain idea.

In general, what happens? I, who am this dot here, have a small vision about justice, for example. A small vision.

So there's something I see that's true. There's something I see that I understand about justice. But I don't have a total idea that's too broad, too deep.

Another person, which is this other dot, we can say the other, the point of view of the other, he will see another aspect of this reality, which has its value, has its truth, but it's different from the point I see. So, normally, I look at this person and as we were commenting, I have the impression, no, her point of view is contrary to mine, it's opposite to mine. In other words, this person has a way of thinking that is aggressive to mine.

And this is a very superficial way of seeing. Because it means that every human being has a small perception of reality. And so that I could understand the point of view of this other person, which is different from mine, what do I have to do?

Go up. That's exactly what I'm showing here in the image. So I would have to go up and be able to now expand my vision, in such a way that, in addition to understanding my point of view, I can now have a broader view, understand the point of view of the other, and even more a series of other elements that I wouldn't understand if I didn't go through that other person.

In other words, the other helps me to be deeper. The experience of each human being in life, life has its experiences in such a rich way, and the human being is so different from each other, that each person had unique experiences. And that's why I have a unique point of view too.

And if I seek to understand the point of view of that person, then I have access to a form of reality that I would never have alone, through only my own points of view. That's why coexistence is such an important element for us. And not the conflictive coexistence, but this coexistence as Sri Ram is proposing.

That is, a coexistence in which I seek to understand the others, and thus expand my vision of reality. And after that, other points of view will arise, different from the one I am now able to focus on. So what am I going to have to do?

Expand again. Therefore, every time I seek to understand a person who thinks differently from me, it means that I will have to grow, expand, and deepen. That's why we can say that this ability to understand the points of view of each other, is what helps us to evolve and grow.

So that we have one more image, one more example, think as if we had several blind people, unable to see, trying to describe what an elephant is, for example. Let's say an elephant as a symbol of wisdom, of deep ideas. So each person will take a part of the elephant.

One will take the leg, the other will take the trunk, the other will take the elephant's tail, the other will take the elephant's belly. And each person, according to that region, which is trying to use the touch to describe what that animal is, will have a vision of reality. For example, the one who takes the trunk of the elephant will say, no, the elephant looks like a hose.

It is a hose. The one who takes the elephant's paw will say, no, the elephant is like the trunk of a tree. You can hug it as if it were the trunk of a tree.

The other who took the tail will say, no, the elephant looks like a powder spanner, like the ones we use at home. The one who takes the elephant's belly will say, no, the elephant is actually like a very big pillow, cute like a very big pillow. Of all these, which have such different points of view from each other, are they wrong?

No. Each one is saying something about this truth that constitutes the elephant. Only each one sees something of this truth.

And if we could put all these points of view together, our vision of facts, our vision of reality, would be much deeper and much closer to the true idea of what the elephant is. That's exactly what Siriham is dealing with in this beautiful, special article of his, which is the point of view of the other. Therefore, the other has a reality that I don't have.

And through the understanding of each other, we can walk in a deeper way towards wisdom. The more a human being understands the point of view of others, the wiser, deeper and smarter he becomes. And at the same time, the more a human being is entrenched in his own point of view, enslaved by his own point of view, the less wise and less intelligent he will also be.

Therefore, it is a very important practice for us, as philosophers, as lovers of wisdom, to seek to understand others. And it is a very important practice for us to seek to put ourselves in the point of view of the other, that is, to really try to imagine ourselves as another person. Why does she think in such a way?

What makes her think like that? And so I grow in my own points of view. And as I mentioned at the beginning, it can lead me to certain realities that were hidden from me, but that through the other I can get to know.

So our love for the truth has to be our estimation to understand more and more the other human beings. And the point that I also find very interesting, that Sri Ram comments on in this article, is that he says that we do not understand the other, the point of view of the other, not out of evil, it is not that we have an evil that we do not want to understand the others, but he says a very interesting key, he says that it is much more because of a lack of our imagination. We lose the ability to imagine how the other thinks, what is his point of view, because it leads him to think in such a way, with such characteristics.

We sometimes think that understanding the other is a way of agreeing with him, and not, quite the opposite, understanding the other leads me to expand my point of view, it does not mean agreeing with what he is commenting, with his way of living or his way of thinking. But we have this difficulty of imagining. And this, for me, is one of the main contributions of Marshall, through non-violent communication, is to help us imagine what the needs of others are, why they behave in such a way, why they think in such a way.

This, for me, is one of his main contributions, to help in this process of our imagination. So, this is one of the most important points that I think we need to understand, this one that I was commenting on, about the point of view of the other. Because if we want to walk towards wisdom, and we all want to, because we want to be philosophers, these lovers and seekers of truth, then it means that I need to walk towards wisdom, to walk towards unity.

Wisdom is unity, they are the same thing, it is the same concept. So it is not so difficult to measure how much I have walked towards wisdom, how much I am walking, or how much I am also regressing in relation to it. Because it would be only for us to measure, in a very objective way, wanting to see ourselves, it would only be for us to measure how our degree of harmony is in our relationship with others.

So we can also measure how we are in relation to wisdom. I can understand people more and more, and generate harmonious relationships with them, so it means that I am walking towards wisdom. Or not, more and more I generate conflicts, and I understand less the others, and the others also understand me less and less.

So it means that I am reversing the walk towards wisdom. That is why this concept is very important, to be clear to us. We can objectively see our walk through the harmony that we generate with others, that is, the unity that we generate with others.

Well, understanding this concept well, we can enter what we call the alienating communication of life. It is precisely when we look for the key, where we will not find it. We put the light of our consciousness in aspects that we have no possibility of generating a way of understanding other people, and not even that other people also understand us.

In this lecture, I will not teach you the process of non-violent communication. It would take many hours for us to do this. But my goal is that each one leaves this lecture knowing what are these places that are looking for no chance of finding.

That is, that each one can realize what are the alienating communications of life that we use ourselves. That is, what are the moments that I am acting like that drunkard in the story. Because we do exactly that.

And I really like this name, I think it is very conducive, this name that Marshall gives, the alienating communication of life, because in fact it is this. It is a form of communication that takes life out of our relationships, leaves them empty, hurts people. All of us, throughout our lives, we have been unconsciously developing, many times, more ways of acting, ways of speaking, which are precisely hurting others and also hurting ourselves.

This is precisely the concept of this alienating communication of life that he will deal with. And the first of these alienating communications that I will comment with you are moral judgments, that we all, in general, do. And it's about us always inferring a fault, a mistake, a badness, something that the person does.

So it's when, for example, we judge, label, criticize, offend others, putting a certain label on them that we are inferring. So I am very focused on defining levels of error or levels of evil for the things that others do. This really takes away all our possibility of being able to find a little compassion, a little understanding of others through our relationships.

And there is something very interesting that Marshall says at this point, that he says the following, that all these judgments, these moral judgments that we make, deep down, behind them, they are simply an expression of needs that we have and are not met. In fact, he says so, it is a lamentable expression of the needs that we have and are not met. In other words, deep down, when we judge something, a person, an act of that person, deep down it is because we had some need, we don't want to see what our need was, so what do I do?

I project on the other. I project on the other person this need that I have. I don't know my need and label and criticize others as a form of projection.

Deep down, these moral judgments, they start there. In my need, which I don't want to see, and I put it as a responsibility of the others. So I'm going to comment on some examples so that this is clearer.

But he also comments that it is a lamentable expression of our needs that we are not seeing, because when they are expressed in this way, as a judgment, as a criticism, as a label, it is very, very, very difficult for people to understand us. Extremely difficult. Sometimes, if people act according to what we want, it is much more because of fear, because of guilt too, that is, because of elements that we don't want to provoke in our relationships, because they are moving people away from their own nature.

When a person acts out of fear, guilt, shame too, it means we are moving away from what is the understanding of others. Neither the person understands us nor do we have the possibility to understand them. So this element is very negative.

And what he comments, that they are expressions of our own needs, you can see that it is like this. For example, if a person has a relationship with another and this other person demands that he pay more attention, so I will think, what? No, I criticize, label this person and say, no, she is lacking and dependent, for example.

But if it is the opposite, if I would like more attention than the person gives me, so what am I going to say? She is insensitive, cold, isn't she? Or when, for example, I have a colleague at work and this colleague is very meticulous, he is very organized in things, so I say he is not, he is rigid in his behavior.

But if it is the opposite, I say he is disorganized, careless. That is, these labels that we put on others are not an expression of people, it is an expression of what we want and what we think people have the obligation to meet us according to our needs. In other words, it is like a form of egocentrism, that is, I think I am in the center of the world, in the center of the universe and that people have to spin around me to please me, they have to spin to meet my needs.

And if they don't meet these needs, then I judge, I am like a judge and start labeling them that way. This is the serious point of moral judges, it has a lot of relationship, when we take it from an internal, deep and philosophical point of view, it has a lot of relationship with our egocentrism. The more egocentric a person is, the more they think others have an obligation to meet their needs, their feelings, their expectations, how they think it is more important to work one way or the other.

The more egocentric she is, the more moral judges she will make of others. So, as Marshall said, which I found very interesting, it is a lamentable expression of our unmet needs and that we ourselves do not want to see, we do not want to assume. And another very interesting point in relation to moral judges that I would like to comment with you, is in relation to criticism, because it will also be expressed, many times, as a criticism of the behavior of others.

And the vast majority of it will be expressed as criticism. Maybe that's why we have so many criticisms at the moment, many moral judges, a lot of misunderstanding of oneself. The criticism, from this philosophical point of view, means that I project on others something that I do not want to understand in myself.

So, when I say that such a person is selfish, is disorganized, is insensitive, or worse than that, when I make this kind of criticism on others, it means, deep down, I'm not seeing this defect in myself. I'm not understanding myself. That is, the criticism is born from something I do not want to see, I do not want to assume myself.

Because selfishness, we all have it to a certain degree. Disorganization, for example, we all have it to a certain degree. I ask you, what human defect do I not have?

We all, all human defects, to some degree, every human being has. So, when I look at a person and criticize and judge, it's like I don't want to see that defect in myself. Ah, but I think I don't have the same degree as the person.

Okay, but if you are aware of your own defect, if you are really aware of it, you know it's so hard for you to fight that degree of it that you have. So, the selfishness that I have, if I really see it in me, how hard is it to get rid of it? The disorganization that I have in me, how hard is it to get rid of it?

And so are all the defects. The intolerance with others that I have, how hard is it to fight that degree of it that exists in me. So, if a person sees himself, he perceives the defects that are in himself, he understands himself, naturally he becomes more tolerant with others.

Because it's like he thinks, look, how hard it is for me, for the person, it must be even harder, because sometimes he is not even aware of it. I, who am aware, I can hardly fight against this defect, imagine another one who is not aware. So, the more I perceive these elements in me, the more tolerant I become with others.

So, this is a very important point for us to realize. Our judgments, our criticisms, they are born from a lack of self-evaluation. They are born when we are not aware of what we are and we are not realizing ourselves the defects that we have.

So, tolerance is a virtue of mature people. A person who does not accept himself cannot be tolerant with others. And our maturity will have a lot to do with it.

The more mature a person is, the more tolerant he becomes. Because more understanding of others, he will acquire. Less moral judgments, he will realize.

There will be more compassion in relationships. Well, this is one aspect. The other, which I would like to comment with you, is about our comparison.

It is another of the alienating communication forms of life. And that we even use too much at the moment. We are always comparing people.

And what I wanted to comment, to make it more objective and clearer, is that when we compare people, we are not having any kind of judgment, no kind of concrete evaluation about the person. When we compare one person with another, we are talking about a relationship of the environment in which this person is inserted, not of herself. Therefore, all the comparison prevents me from understanding people as they are.

I am understanding the environment in which she is inserted. To make it clearer, more objective, imagine the following. Let's say I put a person of medium height in contact with a group of people who have a lower height, they are shorter than her.

So, how am I going to call this person, this first person, who has a medium height? He, in this environment, will be called tall, the tallest of all. But if I take this same person, without changing anything in her, remaining the same person, with the same height, and I put her in relation to several people who are very tall in relation to her, how am I going to call her now?

Short or the shortest? But realize that this person itself, what did she change? Nothing, absolutely nothing in relation to herself.

She remains the same. And depending on the environment where she is, I will call her the lowest or the tallest of the group. That's why all the comparison is very illusory.

It says absolutely nothing about the person. If we are going to be the best or the worst, it doesn't depend on us, it depends on the environment in which we are inserted. So, the comparison is an alienating form of communication, because it doesn't seek to understand people.

On the contrary, it creates illusions of people depending on the means in which we are inserted. So, it's a way that alienates us from the understanding of others. This is another factor.

And another one that I find very interesting, that Marshall comments with us, is about our lack of responsibility for our feelings. This is one of the alienating factors of life too. This denial of responsibility hinders the awareness that each of us is responsible for our own feelings, for our own actions, for everything we feel.

This point of view is interesting. For me, one of the biggest contributions that non-violent communication brings, one of the most important parts for us, is precisely this key that Marshall is bringing. Each human being is responsible for their own feelings.

So, every time we say in our expression, I'm sad because so-and-so did this thing, I'm angry because this thing happened, because they did this or that to me, it means that we are not aware that the only ones responsible for our feelings are ourselves. And we do this a lot through language. We put the cause of what happens to us, the cause of our feelings, which is only ours, and it cannot be changed, it cannot be divided, it cannot be shared with others.

We put this cause in others or in events. And this perception that we are the only ones responsible for what we feel, I consider it something very liberating. I am responsible, so I can determine what I feel.

I'm not a slave. I don't need to be determined by others or by circumstances. I determine myself.

Marshall, in the process of non-violent communication, teaches the person to express themselves, to be aware of this. So, he teaches to express themselves like this. Every time the person says they have a feeling, I'm sad, I'm angry, I'm distressed, they always put the expression like this after that.

Why me? Not because of the other, but because of me. So, I'm sad because I thought this thing, I had such an expectation, I had such a need that did not materialize, or because I wanted this or that.

So, why am I sad? Because of me. So, it's a good way to help with the expression, to generate this awareness.

It's interesting because he comments that many people in the workshops that he did about it, comment like this, but I don't like to express myself like this, because I feel more comfortable and think it's the other's fault. That's exactly what we do. But this idea that he's bringing, as I said, for me, is one of the most important of non-violent communication.

I'm responsible for the things I feel. The Stoics, the Stoic philosophers, spoke of this same element in a very similar way. That, in fact, it's not the experiences of life, the circumstances of life, the other people who do something with us, what leaves us in such a way.

No, in reality, it's the angle we choose to look at the experiences. It's the way I choose to look that will determine what I will live and that will determine what I will feel. Epictetus, for example, has a sentence that I find very interesting.

He said, people are not disturbed by things, but by the way they come. That is, depending on the way I choose to look at the experiences, I will have a totally different experience. So it doesn't depend on what happens to me, it depends on myself, my vision and my look.

So, as I said, this point, for us, in fact, is very liberating, because if I want to be happy, my human happiness, it only depends on myself. It doesn't depend on others, nor does it depend on circumstances. So, if I want and if I choose, I can look for the right angles and be happy through my experiences, through my life.

As I said, for me, this is a very liberating element. What Marshall indicates is that we can separate very well, to understand this well, separate very well what is the stimulus from what is the cause of our feelings. So, okay, the stimulus can be others.

From an attitude of a person, something they told me, I can have a stimulus to feel sadness, anguish, anger, or any other kind of feeling. But this could never be considered the cause, as Epictetus says. Then the way we choose is to look at the experiences.

So, if a person, for example, tells me something and I get sad or offended with what she tells me, what should I look for? What is my responsibility for this feeling? Because then I will be able to be free and not be conditioned by others and not by circumstances.

So, if I felt offended, for example, what was it that generated this? In me, not in the other. Well, sometimes I had a need to be seen in such a way by a person.

This is mine, it's my responsibility. Or sometimes I'm with my hurt pride. This is also my responsibility.

Sometimes I needed to show something that the person did not understand. Or show a certain image of me that the person did not understand. It does not mean it's my responsibility.

If a person throws a stone at me, which is what Marsha is calling a stimulus, if she throws a stone, if I'm going to be hit by the stone or not, if I'm at the height of the stone for her to hit my head, then it depends on me. So, this is what we call cause. I'm putting myself at the height of the stone, what am I generating?

What is making these elements determine me? Why am I being conditioned by what others comment or by the image that others make of me? For example, all our feelings, we can seek this same association.

We should look for what is my responsibility. Because I can act on them, on my responsibility, changing the angle with which I am seeing the experiences, as Epictetus says. And not being conditioned and enslaved by the circumstances and opinions of others.

For me, an image that I find very special, that helps me a lot to realize this idea in practice, is a video that circulated a while ago on the internet, that I find very beautiful, very special. Maybe many of you have already watched it, have already seen it, because it is very short, which is about the story of Mr. Virginia.

She tells her story, and for those who don't know, never saw it, to sum it up, she is a lady, in this video she is over 80 years old, and she is recording a video telling a little bit of her story, that she had, when she was a few months old, she had poliomyelitis, and then she had certain paralysis in certain parts of the body, she couldn't walk in such a way, and had a series of health complications due to this. And she, recording the video, for me, that's why it's an image that helps us a lot to realize this responsibility that each of us has about our emotional states, about how we are going to behave in front of life, she comments on this video with a lot of joy, with a lot of lightness, telling about her life. And something interesting that she comments is that, she says that when she was a child, she was the only one in her city, which was a small city, she was the only one she knew, she had not seen anyone else, only her, really.

And then, as she was the only one, she decided to realize, she decided to interpret this, that God had something to show the world through her, because she was the only one who existed, so she had some kind of special gift. Look at that beautiful view, what an angle to look at, and to be able to focus our experiences. How beautiful!

What would be the angle, I like to ask myself this, what would be the angle that most people would interpret these experiences? A punishment, a way of spending their whole life sad, unsatisfied, anguished, thinking that life is unfair, that they gave me a punishment, and that people look at me in a certain way because of that. And look at the posture and maturity of Mr.

Virginia, since she was a child. There is something that I have to show the world, through this experience. And her whole life lived with a lot of joy.

She says that doctors told her that if she tried to have children, she would die in labor, because of the constitution of her bones. And she had five children, that is, she decided that she would never believe in it, and she did what she did. They even said that she would not survive many years, she was already 80 years old, recording this video of hers, so it shows us very interesting elements.

And the part I like the most, bringing you this image of her, the part I like the most in the video is at the end, when she says like this, most people think that life does some things to us, but I always thought that it is the way we look at life that makes life what it is. That is, that is exactly what historians were commenting. She realized exactly the same thing.

And then she still comments, I realized through my life, that I am the one who makes the experiences of my life. This, for me, is the perfect synthesis. And if we understood this, it would make it much easier to understand what blocks our communication with others, which is to think that it is always the fault of what happens to us, and the reason for what we feel is in others.

And these beautiful experiences, or these images like that of Mr. Virginia, help us to realize that it is not me, that I am really responsible for what I feel, for the way I think, or for the way I also act. And therefore, I can look for a more suitable viewing angle for each experience.

That's what we should do. Instead of blaming others, we should be responsible for what we feel, or for how we are. It's like, have you ever seen that sometimes, a person who is a photographer, who has this certain ability, we are looking at a place, and we think it's a normal landscape, we don't see anything.

But this person, when he is a photographer, a good photographer, sometimes he takes something that everyone was looking at, and didn't see anything, but he finds a certain angle, a certain position to take the photo. You look and feel the perfect thing. And we look and say, I was here, I hadn't seen it that way, I was here, I hadn't seen it from that angle, I hadn't seen this beauty of the experience.

He finds the angle of the camera, the angle of view, that will bring the greatest beauty to the landscape. That's what we should also learn to look for in our experiences. What is the best angle of view?

What is the angle I can find that gives me more depth, that gives me more wisdom, that gives me more intelligence, within this circumstance of life? So, this depends exclusively on us. That's why I say it again, when we put the responsibility of what we feel to others, we are slaves.

We are always giving our happiness, our most precious good, in someone else's hands. Someone will determine for me if I am happy or not. This is absurd.

In fact, if we understand it this way, we are the only ones responsible for what we feel. So, we do acquire freedom. I determine my own happiness.

So it's not in the hands of others, it's in my own hand. That allows me this degree of happiness. This, as I said, is one of the most beautiful elements for me and most important for this process of communication.

Because the root of all violence, as you can see, is exactly when we attribute the fault of what happens to us to the other. How is he guilty? That's where all the processes of violence are generated.

So, if we assume this responsibility, we break the root of our violence with others. And that is also the root of the violence that is expressed between societies, between countries and the whole world in various circumstances. I attribute to others the fault and responsibility for myself.

Well, and for us to get into the last element of these factors that block life, that obstruct life, we will talk about the compliments. Marshall himself comments that for most people it is a surprise when it comes to compliments, as an alienating communication of life. Because it is usually considered that compliments are very good, that help people.

And he says that several managers, for example, in companies, when he did this kind of course, of classes within these organizational environments, many managers commented to him that no, that the compliment is something super important for the person to be able to do more, produce more. And it is precisely this element, I would say that this is an important image to understand why Marshall considers compliments alienating from life. I find it very interesting, this point of view of him.

Because he says that, most of the times, it is used to manipulate others to do what I want. That is, the compliment, often, not always, but often it is used as a way of manipulation. And you can see that, be very attentive, because if a person wants to manipulate us, the first thing she will do is praise us.

That's why I find it very interesting this way he comments on compliments. It's not that he says that compliments are always negative, but that they are used as a way of celebrating life with others, and not for the other to do what I want. Not to stimulate, so that he has more motivation to do something that is important to me.

In this way, it is a way of manipulation. We just have to be a little careful with this element of compliments. I would also say the following, that besides that he puts another point of great attention to compliments.

It's because, in excess, they can develop a vanity in others. There is a story that illustrates well about this. It says that one day, a man was walking through a forest and saw several lizards crawling on the ground.

And he had a little lizard there that was crawling. He looked at her and thought, poor thing, is crawling so much on the ground. One day it will become a butterfly.

But he was sorry for her at that moment that she could not fly. And then he looked at her and said, how are you a fast lizard? How are you beautiful as a lizard?

And the lizard was doing good for her, complimenting. He left. After a while, he came back and saw that all the other lizards had become butterflies.

And he gave her back to the one he had complimented. Because she felt so good, so special, as a lizard, she became so vain, as a lizard, that she never evolved to another form, which was a butterfly. I think this story illustrates very well the danger and the attention we must have with compliments.

Because sometimes we want to praise a person because we would like to be praised. But we have to be careful. Because vanity does exactly that what happened to the little lizard.

It traps us. It immobilizes us. It creates a false vision of ourselves.

So we all have to be careful when we make compliments to others. I would say that we think, compliments, all right, but be careful with the excesses. Be careful with very great compliments.

Because it may be that it does exactly like the lizard. That is, it generates evil for the person. It alienates her from her own vision.

And we may think it is very special for the amount of compliments she receives. And if a person thinks she is very special, she does not walk. She does not become a butterfly.

And about compliments, there is something that I think is interesting that Marshall comments, in the sense of when we receive compliments. So when people are complimenting us, how to deal with it? Because we usually tend to fall in two extremes.

One extreme is a false humility, which is to keep denying compliments. So if a person wants to compliment us, and we keep saying, no, but it's not like that. No, but it was not so much like that.

That was so-and-so too. So there is a false humility that is not good. Or the other extreme is to really fall in a vanity, in a very large egocentrism to start finding yourself more special than the others.

To start finding yourself very special. Which is also a very negative element from a human point of view. So we usually deal with compliments And then he comments that through his experience, he found a way to receive these compliments well that he received, without falling in one extreme or the other.

I also found this way very interesting and I wanted to share it with you. He said he learned from a friend of his who was a Muslim, a Sufi, once, when he participated in one of Marshall's training, and he went to thank him in the end. Because he said it was very important for him, he had learned many important things, and he would like to thank him in the way they do in their culture, the Sufis, how they thank others.

He said he took Marshall's hand and said I thank God who is in you for giving us what you gave us. And he kissed his hand. And Marshall said he was very impacted by this experience and found in it a beautiful and deep way to deal with compliments, realizing that all of us can be a channel of life.

That is, this friend of his said I thank God who is in you. That is, the deepest aspect, the highest, the life that is in you that allows us to give what you gave, that is, that allows us to be a factor of sum in the lives of others. And when we interpret the compliment in this way, we in a certain way we personify it.

It is not praising ourselves, our intellectual characteristic of brilliance, our physical beauty, or any other aspect of our personality. No. Every human being has this channel with the essence of life and can give us something through this channel.

So compliments can be seen in this way, how we can be a channel and how we can add up the lives of others. It is what in the language, for example, of the Templars, we like a lot, it would be the same as saying nothing for me, Lord, everything for the glory of your name. That is, the compliments are not for me, it is for what is in me.

And that there is also in the other human beings, that can express itself through me, as a channel. So being a channel of life is a way of perceiving, a way of receiving and interpreting these compliments. And so I would like to close our meeting today, our lecture today, asking that each one can seek to do this exercise, find this commitment and this responsibility to try to be a channel of life.

Because every human being can be this channel of life, so that they can want to contribute and add up more and more with the others. And that each one feels this commitment to be able to help others to grow, add up through them. And one of the best ways that we can have to help every human being to grow, one of the most efficient ways we have, is by understanding each person as they are.

This understanding frees the person and makes them grow. It is what is expressed, for example, in all these fairy tales, myths, when they show that, for example, the princess falls in love with the frog and she has to kiss the frog and then he will turn into a prince. Or in the story of the Beauty and the Beast, for example, she has to love him and accept him as a beast.

After that, he will turn into a prince. The understanding between human beings has a huge power to help the person to awaken what she has inside and grow. So I hope that each one can feel this commitment, as I said, in the current moment where we need so much understanding between human beings, to have this understanding factor and that it can help each one to awaken the best they have, because they were able to be understood.

So I wish you all a great night. Thank you.