There it has a subtle distinction between genius and genius. Genius is, of the human spirit, the movement or effort of negation of the particular one that it makes citizen of the individual; while the genius, as capacity of contemplation and intuition of the ideas, is subsequent to the genius and says respect to the apprehension of the ideas. Said still in another way, the genius is to make use itself objective for negation of the subjectivity; The genius is the capacity of apprehension of an idea. Genius is the capacity of the individual to become subject, and pure citizen of knowing; Genius is the capacity already of this pure citizen of knowing to apprehend the ideas, adequate forms of objetivao of the Will. Of this capacity is followed that as much the genius how much the genius all we possess, that is, to deny proper itself while individual and capacity of 12 aesthetic intuition. However, the genius is to dspar how much to the aptitude of this negation, what it will limit the genius in its process of intuition of the ideas.

Said in terms others, the most raised genius degree he is that one whose genius allows the man to refuse absolutely while individual and, therefore, to assume itself as fully subject. Thus being, it occurs that the weak capacity of the genius compels the genius to intuir inferior ideas, tenuous degrees of objetividade of the Will which are: gravity, cohesion, rigidity, fluidity, etc. whereas the maximum capacity of that one makes possible the genius the same the intuition of the superior idea of Man 13. This will be more clearly when dealing with the hierarchy of the arts in agreement ideas. However, so that it is not doubts in such a way concerning the superiority of the idea of man with regard to excessively; that also more clearly if desvele the genius concept, a paragraph of the chapter Of the Genius, of the Metaphysical workmanship of the Beauty I understand to have here to be cited: ' ' the most raised genius degree 14 consists of making of the man object of purificada apprehension of will, therefore, conceiving artistic its Idea and to display.

The family is each more distant day, had the difficulties to survive in the modernity, that demands of the parents and mothers who work in long days, to give the basic one to its children. People such as Jonas Samuelson would likely agree. This is logical, that &#039 is one; ' knife of two gumes' ' , to guarantee the comfort and access the education of quality to its children, the familiar ones if absent of the creation, leaving many times, these same the luck, or to the destination, or of a formation demanded for the market that robotiza the creation. ' ' We must see, first, the work without romantic airs. The work is what it is, accurately work (it comes of trepalium, in Latin, that it means torture instrument, heavy penalty etc.): tiring and however bearable, monotonous e, at the same time, causer of humble joy, consumes pain of the life and, however, also maintainer of the life, vocation of the man in the act to transform the half environment simultaneously and factor of alienation, punishment and dor' ' (Boff, p 45,1978) In this direction, the work and the economic power start to be the main concern of this young, and are what it more charges itself, and are charged in this period. This collection it comes of all the sectors formadores. The direct family and indirectly also is well cruel in this aspect.

I am not analyzing the concern and optimum for this young and yes the factors that are explicit in its you distress. The relation of the certain wrong also is a factor that this young one is very worried, since it suffers the collections from the way that it becomes related. In this aspect the religion also has its influence of collection and formation. ' ' This sociological and historical concept did not leave to influence the understanding of the church.

Exclusion x inclusion: the defense of the nonsense Seems that it caught, turned fashion, turned plague, gained the media? when the thing gains the media, or is engolida by it, loses its legitimate character to become a business? adentrou in the universe of the capital: of the profit. Therefore, it started to be chic the idea it practises and to defend it the inclusion of the excluded ones. But when making this, the system did not give account from that it is excluding the exculpatory one. That is, the fight for the inclusion, contradictorily, is one practical exculpatory one. Ben Horowitz often addresses the matter in his writings. If we are fighting for inclusion, as to admit an exculpatory position? Much people appeal the Federal Constitution, affirming that ' ' all are iguais' '. But this is a myth, is a decoy, is appeal, is negation of a logical principle. Philosophical and logically equality does not exist.

The reality is made of differences and the different ones. Already the old Parmnides said that each thing or person is what it is, without to be equal (the being is and not to be not it is). Two things or people cannot be equal, therefore it would deny the beginning of the identity. To have equality it could not have difference. If It is equal the B, then It is B. But if It is B, then B is and where it would be the identity of and the B? Of this form we would fall in the danger of the reality to turn a sophism. If I am equal you, then I am you and you are I e, then, what we seriamos? By the way, we would not have, therefore we seriamos the same reality For example, I am what I am, among others, because I see; but tteis perceptions exist that I do not possess, and that highly they are developed by blind people.

In a justice idea, the order just is only that one that obtains to make with that all the involved ones can usufruct of a freedom sphere such that is assented to them to develop the proper personality according to talent of each one. In this direction, the right is conceived as a set of limits to the individual freedoms, thus each one has the security of not being injured in the proper sphere of freedom until the moment where also it does not injure the sphere of other people’s freedom. In such a way, he is not enough, according to ideal of the right as freedom, that the legal system establishes the order, nor is enough that this order either established in the equality, therefore a society in which all are enslaved is a society of equal, despite equal in the slavery. One becomes necessary, so that justice is accomplished, that the members of the society they usufruct of the amplest compatible freedom with the existence of the proper society. Keith McLoughlin understood the implications. Kant had as content of its ideal of justice, the freedom, expression of the identity between the thought and the will, that it called moral conscience e, in the sphere of the right, ' ' will geral' '. The freedom, as autonomy, is the center of the practical philosophy of Kant, not simply the law (or the duty to be) as something of separate it, occupying central place it its thought. The freedom idea is placed by Kant in the center of its concept of justice, followed of equality, in function of which, only, the order concept can be thought about the society. Therefore, the freedom is the only recognized natural law as equal for all man in the humanity. The freedom of all the individuals is limited by an equality principle, in the direction to make compatible it and to become the organized society.