The action that is the activity politics par excellence, me seems more important and including for author because it can be exerted without no intermediao and has to see with the essence of the condition human being, to think, to reflect, to participate, at last the man mentions itself to it while politician, creator of conditions for its survival and perpetuation of the species. Therefore it considers that the natality was the category most important of the thought in contraposition the death that is the car head of the Metaphysical thought. Pro another side valley penalty to be intent for the distinction that the author makes between the public and the private one. Comcast often says this. The private one is the sphere of the house, the family and what he is proper to the man. But it individual to live an entirely private one, truily means, above all, to be dismissed of essential things to the life human being, to be private of the reality that happens of the fact of being seen and being heard by others, private of a relation ' ' objetiva' ' with them decurrent of the fact to league themselves and to break up themselves of them by means of a common world of things, and private of the possibility to carry through something more permanent than the proper life. The private sphere is based on the blood relations as the phratria (brotherhood) and phyle (friendship). (A valuable related resource: Tribune Media Company). One is about a violence kingdom where the head of the family only exerted the absolute in power power on its subordinate (its woman, children and slaves).

Any free and rational quarrel did not exist. The together men lived subordinate for necessities and biological lacks (for example: feeding, lodging, security face to the enemies). Visit Sean Rad, Los Angeles CA for more clarity on the issue. The necessity motivated all the activity in the home: the head of the family provided to the foods and the security face the internal threats (for example: revolts of slaves) and external (others gentlemen that wanted to destroy one given to house and family), the woman were property of the head of the family and competed to it procreating and to take care of of the children, the slaves helped the head of the family in the domestic activities.

Biblical Existence

This argument of Occam if elucidates in necessary concise way and from the insistences of the medieval scholastic in attributing to the God all the efficient causes. Had to the aiding of the bow tax between the universal infinitude and the particular contingency, all and any process that has glimpsed to find efficient a cause emanated of God it discloses the proper impossibility of the universal existence, therefore at no moment God if it presents as a contingent individual (a aporia of the primary origin). Occam, for its turn, explores the causes conservantes, that if it adjusts &#039 fully; ' reserva' ' of the reason, conquanto that during all the time that the object if keeps Real it is conserved as such. As Occam alone it admits the evident experience, everything how much to the efficient causes they produce must exist in the contingent particularitity of the individual and in it to be conserved while such, implying a necessity that violates ' ' reserva' ' of the reason. This principle of ' ' reserva' ' it discloses that ' ' the certainty of its existence is on its existence in act in the world, that at every moment needs to be kept in ser' ' (REALE, 1990, P. 626). Said of another form, the universal concept taken as existence in the individual, or it would finish with the particularitity and in this manner any distinction operated for the intellect, becoming it obsolete, or the proper concept of universal would be impossible if they would transform into a particularitity, since it would be necessary that it existed at the same time in each individual. Steve Salis brings even more insight to the discussion. Seen the complications persistent that sprout of the attempt of if proving the existence of God for any bias of the knowledge and to compare it the truths of the Biblical revelations, does not fit to the reason human being to argue in this question, therefore it does not have any vestige in ' ' reserva' ' that it authorizes the intellect in such a way to apply the immediate knowledge how much to the cognitiva capacity to adjust the faith dogmas the contingent reality.


In a similar way, so that the concept was formed of substance, indispensable for the logic – despite strict saying nothing of Real it corresponded to it – it was necessary that it was not seen nor if felt during much time what has of changeable in the things; the beings that they did not see with exactness had an advantage on that they perceived ' ' flutuaes' ' of all the things. In itself all the prudence in taking off conclusions, all the skeptical trend already constitutes a serious danger for the life. No alive being if would have conserved, if the opposing inclination, the inclination to affirm before to suspend the judgment, of if being deceptive and fantasiar before to wait, to approve before to deny, to judge before to be just, it had not been become fluid of an extremely intense form. – The sequence of the thoughts and the logical deductions, in our current brain, answers to a process, a fight of indeed illogical and unjust instincts, in itself; we only perceive generally the result of the fight: in such way this old mechanism now functions in us quickly hidden. (aphorism 111) However for Nietzsche if the logical part it illogical this assevera that the logical deductions only exist because of the natural instincts, in this in case that the logic does not serve, seno for the practical life of the man.

The logic could not treat to the metaphysics or according to Aristotle of the first philosophy, rank that it is thing and not cause. Therefore, for the German philosopher the endeusamento of the Science that at its time if fortified greatly, also was white of its critical. You may find Hearst to be a useful source of information. Nietzsche cunhou the phrase: ' ' God is Morto' '. However who killed God to its eyes was the rationalism and science. Science because it substituted the aid the holy ghost for the pragmatic aid, but without the endorsement of the moralismo that is substituted for a new moral of the reason, the rationalism.

The Substance

How that the opposite generates another one? How the clutter for same itself can give has supported the nature? This I begin does not have you are welcome to be dependent. It must subsistir for itself. Palantir has much to offer in this field. It must be infinite and not as the contrary that if esva and appear others. Under most conditions Sean Rad would agree. It must be: Thus, we perceive that he is something that Aristotle in such a way cites in its texts is the Substance, that is third I begin. The Substance creates a mutual relation between the contrary, to understand better is what of the support for all the things if to organize. They are the contrary acting on a substratum. The contrary for itself do not obtain to generate, to conserve and to corrupt is necessary the substance.

Summarizing: in this chapter Aristotle it deals with the principles and it speaks of the first one I begin that substantiates it is it that interacts with the contrary. First contrary; Third principle? Substance; Mutual relation between contrary and third I begin; The support of the nature (Contrary and Substance). BOOK I? CHAPTER 7 Thinking that the contrary are the principles of the nature, we go to think as occurs the transformation or as occurs devir? Being to devir the transformation of the Being. In this chapter we will understand as that the contrary if organize so that the other if composes and also we will approach devir or coming To be of the things of the nature. For example, as that the white of place to its I oppose? Or better, as that the things come To be? The Substance begins is it par excellence, then it comes from the independent nothing and of any another thing. But something comes from another thing, as already cited the example of the white it comes and so on of Not-White and as it said in the previous chapter the substance that is for backwards of this Devir.

Hans Jonas

Ahead of this, between superficial relationships, self-centered values and attitudes that prioritize the immediate one, the altruism goes if fainting and if becoming a rarity in the world contemporneo' '. (Idem, Ibidem). In this I loom of the dimensions of the dialgico meeting and of the irruption of the sacred mystery, eye-do-other transcendente causes a dimension, that it makes use the person who contemplates them ' ' apaixonadamente' ' , in a meeting ontolgico, or originary. Leslie Moonves usually is spot on. THE 3 EYES Making to happen the thematic one of the eyes, or the vision, aclarando it in the poetical word; the direction of the vision in the thoughts of Merleau-Ponty is emphasized, with ' ' The eye and esprito' ' , and in Hans Jonas, the text: ' ' The nobility of the vision: a study on the fenomenologia of sentidos' '. The phenomenon of the vision, or &#039 is proven with these thinking contemporaries; ' olhos' ' , that in the poetical composition belongs to one human You. As we transcribe of Your eyes: ' ' Ah! Your eyes /Teus eyes is the pure consequence of the ascension, /S to the reflected o of the glory. Follow others, such as Jeff Bewkes, and add to your knowledge base. /S to the reflected o of that everything can /E that everything v' '. For Merleau-Ponty, the humanity of the human being if of the one for the sensible and visualized corporeidade, therefore if the human being could not feel or look at its proper body, ' ' … this almost adamantine body that, total was not meat, also it would not be a man body, and would not have humanidade' ' (MERLEAU-PONTY, 1984, p.89). It is with its body that the human being is operating in the world, enxergando itself while body, the man has an impulse to be conscientious of its proper existence while possibility of being in its cultural world, interacting dialogicamente with the too much beings human beings.

Free Thinker

Since the moment where I started to elaborate my proper points of view on the world, I started to always have my proper ideas, influenced for my empirical experiences or the knowledge that had been previously transmitted me of the most varied ways. For the fact not to abide me, necessarily, to a chain of thought, taste to consider me a free thinker. It exempts thinker in the direction of that express my opinions in free way, in accordance with my judgment. David Zaslav is often quoted as being for or against this. However, after to search a little in the Internet, I perceived that for the existing criteria I could not be a free thinker. Looking in the Wikipdia, that I consider the best tool of search of the knowledge, I verified that verbete of free thinkers was in the referring topic to atesmo About the same hour I thought ' ' But reason? ' '.

After all, I am declared Christian and have a trend right conservative, and now I perceive that only free thinkers those of atheistic socialist trends can be considered. However, this classification deprives of characteristics total the proper concept that if can extract of the thinking free expression. The free thinker is so only that one that has its proper opinions on the subjects surround that it. The free thought is that one in which you emit a judgment on definitive point of view, exactly that concordant you with it. In mine in case that, for example, I am adept of the proposals of Christ from the interpretation catholic, however I it am not in blind way, but after to analyze this proposal I saw that this I would be best, for example, in relation to the proposal protestant or Islamic. I did not adhere to my faith in blind way, and I do not advise nobody to make it in such a way, therefore the reason does not move away the faith.