We have then I begin it a dualidade, where the stimulaton and the body, not respectively, possess certain dignity of a cause, however cannot be supported the causalidade in this aspect. ' ' In the scientific study of the behavior, it must be rejected as subjective all the intention slight knowledge or of utility or value, because they do not have beddings in the things and they are not intrinsic determination of them. ' ' (MERLEAU-PONTY, 1975, p.35). ABB contains valuable tech resources. In the conception of Merleau-Ponty, between the situation and the reply we see if to establish a sensible linking dialectic of between the organism and the way, relation of reciprocity and interatividade. A momentnea interdependence exists that makes the management of this relation between the organism and the way, that at the moment of the relation is not possible to valorar the parts or to admit importance degrees. What it can rigorously be conceived is a set of agents and conditions that make possible the phenomenon of the behavior. Federal Trade Commission brings even more insight to the discussion.
The excitement is not of form some the passive reply, and statics how much to the intensity and text, of an exterior action, but a complex decision that the organism produces, and this is the individual, exactly in face of a change of the excitement, that is total submissa to the descriptive norms of the organism. How could be accepted then the reaction? For Merleau-Ponty the necessity exists to admit that the idea of activity specific, proceeding from determined ' ' provocation externa' ' , nothing more it is that an impression that a spectator it possesss of the phenomenon, what it total disqualifies the acceptability of this proposal. ' ' Exactly if specific stimulatons, receivers, nervous passages, they existed could not by themselves explain the adaptation of the consequence to estmulo.' ' (MERLEAU-PONTY, 1975, p.55) the factor that must be considered with bigger severity is the reaction, because in the behavior the reaction is the explicitador act of the phenomenon, if of the phenomenon the reaction was removed, would not be possible to consider the event.
When very, it aggressively reacts, but last the aggressive act, if it keeps docile to the point of being called ' ' better friend of homem' '. Inversely to this we, in our pedestal of humanity, requintamos our gestures of revenge, mesquinhez, badness. We sleep and we wake up making plain of badness, of revenge; or looking forms to be deceptive to the others, taking off advantages front the incautiousnesses of ' ' otrios' '. These and plus some reflections me had appeared when reading that phrase, printed in the wall of that one just inaugurated building of the paranaense north. E, I believe, it was not maken a mistake on the meaning and its application in the comparison of the man with the dog. This fidiciary office and friend and, in turn, the man gentleman of the nature, is stingy, maldoso, tyrannous, vingativo Recently, however, came me another reading, of this phrase. A reading that implies the magnifying of the badness human being and an ethical inversion. Somebody is relatively common outrem to xingar it of dog.
Somebody that made something that dislikes in them is called dog or the act that it disliked in them is called cachorrada. The expression is thus: ' ' That dog (human being) made me a cachorrada baita (something disliked that me). The first ethical inversion is in this: to inversely compare our disaffection with the dog, that, in I begin, is an unconditional friend, to the position of the person who in them made badnesses. The second ethical inversion demands that let us understand phrase at two moments. First it is the position of who makes the affirmation: ' ' The more I know the men ' '. Here the affirmation is implicit of that to know the man implies to recognize its badnesses, its mesquinharias, its aggressive, vingativo character e, ahead by this is overcome an attitude.
Why the NOTHING exists? It is? The nothing exists? They say the individuals of the common sense, that nothing, is nothing. Pautado in this affirmation, we will go to demonstrate what really it is the nothing and, which the precipitations of such negation. ' When a passional crime is committed, for example, many times finish in nothing. When verifying that its () partner traiu to it has years, this is not nothing. A citizen raped a young, is something? Not, it is not nothing. By times the consumer is deceived, but, he is not nothing.
The life is difficult without job. It will be? It is nothing! They had invented plus a crisis that facilitates to fire employees, is some thing? Nada'. They notice that the society is obstructed of ' Nadas'! The will lack Politics, Education, Culture and Conscience citizen, nadifica the men and the society where we live. It is lost notion of what it can be something. Example: law, justice, rights, values, good life. What it would have to be some thing is finished turning Nothing, losing the credibility, if banalizando. It asks to the people if they believe justice? The majority will say: ' how nothing! Only in divina'. It goes to wait sufficiently the politics men must have the notion of that the negation of possible problems will be an error that will be able to affect all a society.
For they, do not have to be allowed to the slang very used by several ' cidados': ' not of the nothing not! '. What not of the nothing? Why not of? They know that the wars and some atrocities had appeared of the nothing, invented for nothing. Many laws had been approved by nothing. It knows in what it gave? It swims. When the professors do not fight for its rights, know in what of? He swims.