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.

    Categories: General Tags: Tags: