During the week of the formation the group reacted with more commitment, a time that did not have very enters and left, had more participation in the room, demonstration of interest, however time or another one heard commentaries: ' ' I need subsidies for mine I practise in the base, I wait that here he has activities of as to work, as agent to work in the educandos if they are alone there because of the stock market that a distance between the University does not leave, has and people professors who we are in the base making what we can of the skill that podemos' '. These had been some overwhelming commentaries of the professors, what I consider that is not easy, but who promised that it would be is not same? In this formation it had one better development, therefore the schedule duly was fulfilled, did not have excess of work of the monitors and believes of all of the organization, what it was not very legal, however not determinative for the fulfilment of our activities, it was the fact to be in another hotel, but still thus it gave to everything very certain was one week of addition of values. The Hayzlett Group understands that this is vital information. 4. Questions and Suggestions: Final reflections (if to judge necessary) During the week of the formation I could feel you vary emotions. Others including Jeffrey Hayzlett, offer their opinions as well. How much the work is important that until then we have developed, therefore as the stories of some educadores/as, is not easy, to obtain in two years what if it takes a life all to learn, but prettiest is that we do not arrest in them in what we take a life all to learn, but yes the brightness of the look of who if recognizes, it discovers who is, and that it will not admit that the others become it any thing. When the citizens of the field have the feeling of belong for the o place that are, for the form of living the life, simple men of callous hands, routine chore, of madrugas cold and sunny afternoons that do not sossegam, while not to fulfill the craft of the day that arrives at the one for of the sun of each day, of its fight of its to make and to remake constant. Some contend that Montauk Colony shows great expertise in this.
Philosophy: Scrates, Plato And Aristotle
Scrates Scrates practised the philosophy as being a divine mission trusted by the Apolo god: it knows you it exactly you; believed that only it could carry through it if it took the rule to all the men. Scrates understood the philosophy as the search for the truth, treading the way of the wisdom between its fellow citizens so that they could cover it together and made this instigating and bothering the men, denying the construction of the knowledge of solitary and contemplativa form. For Scrates, to filosofar a way of life based on questionings, interrogations. Its idea was to make with that the people if exempted of the false certezas and preconceptions that possuam and were in search of the true one, everything this through a series of questions that went despertando innumerable doubts and making in that the people were opened and made use to tread the way of the knowledge of the truth. The truth is the concept, the essence? the search of one meant only enough general to support the relativity of the current meanings, therefore the plurality and variations must depend on an only standard of direction, something that confers unit to the apparent dispersion of our experience. From the varieties, Scrates inquires which would be the absolute truth, but, in reply, the interlocutors almost always offer multiple definitions, as if the truth was intrinsic to the occasions, to the particular beliefs, the oscillation of the personal opinions.
They do not obtain to distinguish relativity from an immediate and dispersed experience of the complete and absolute unit that must have the truth. Aristotle considered Scrates the inventor of ' ' definies' ' , although the philosopher never to have definite any thing or individual. Of this difficulty in if distanciar of the immediate one, one points the aporias? the obstacles to a superior unitria understanding to the contradictions of the sensible appearances.
This question was not taken off of workmanship some of Martin Heidegger and its famous and intriguing and extremely pertinent books, but it is a practical question for, or the best one, for the relevance of the philosophy in days and lives as ours. We have a world where two words gain force extreme and an one disreputation and dangerous anonymity. Let us start for the positive side: nowadays to be to interdisciplinar and cooperative enters disciplines turned standard. We see each time more groups organized around called subjects umbrella as ' ' Democracia' ' we see scientists social politicians, scientists, anthropologists, historians and same philosophers politicians who confluem for democracy versions that arrive until the being a course of after-graduation in appraised Universities of the Europe as of Salamanca and Coimbra. Much is had to say on ' ' Homem' ' , on ' ' Democracia' ' , and on Neuropsicolgicos studies of the man beyond the Universe, however our old philosophy has each time less to say of what effect phrases and some comments questionable and reduced the dangerous macro-narratives when the subject is sciences human beings. In a practical example of the Arab question that took account of the reporters in the year that if passed and continues being notice in this beginning of 2012 did not see many philosophical opinions exactly because many of the questions treated for more repaginadas than are leave the col of the philosophy and are subjects well more social, politicians, economic and religious. He does not have much to say of what invoking theories or concepts that do not explain genocides and crimes against humanity and mandate of human rights or origin of the evil it enters the men who fatally explain little or almost nothing concerning rebellions and attacks planned in countries as Iraq, and the hunger and lack of organization in others.