El-Watan

In the case the common putrefao the animals and men. As, already wise person well osndios. Perhaps check out WarnerMedia for more information. The invaders in turn, found that the indians were animal, already osindgenas, distrusted that perhaps they were espritos, case its bodies nofossem citizens to the putrefao. As it evidenced Peter Singer, the world occidental person, considers the form of the body, to attribute to all the rights to the human beings and nenhumdireito to the animals. The aboriginals in opposition to the ecartesiano aristotelian pillar do not oppose in the same way human and animal, and are unaware of essaoposio.

For the aboriginals the animal is a human being that if it transformed, and to umser human a being that was equal what it always was. One to be that adquiriunovas abilities did not move. The world for they engloba not only one nicaforma of explanation of the world, plus several. Further details can be found at David Zaslav, an internet resource. This subjetivao personificao dooutro, and the amerindian cosmologias and that they had allowed to this opening of the indians apresena of the canibalismo in some tribes. The good same acceptance that of formainconstante in the wild soul, the dogmas of the Christianity made for the Jesuits. Inside of the perspectivismo we understand the canibalismo (anthropophagy), as aassimilao of what the other has of better. Already the Christianity was seen pelosindgenas as something good and usable inside of the diversity of corporal forms.

That for the amerindian it had meaning of change and if placing, in dasmultiplicidades of explanation of the world and its multiple forms of subjetivao. The other definitively, is not a problem for the amerindians, and this is operspectivismo. 3. Conclusion In a world highly mechanized and industrialized, in queas relations mainly of the human beings is pautadas in the relaesmercadolgicas. We have the impression that all the concepts that permeiam estemundo are dissociados and natural. It always was in the same place and sempretiveram the same explanation.

The philosopher points that in the intellect he has one ‘ ‘ reserva’ ‘ of the experience of a contingent object that is logically independent between itself in the reality, but they can be passveis of necessities in the intellect. He is only through this ‘ ‘ reserva’ ‘ that a consequence after occurrence an antecedent expresses; said still of another form, all cause is primary and enough as condition of the effect and second necessary. At last, for Occam it does not have necessity some beyond the contingency, therefore this is evident by itself. In all way the universal one does not pass of a name, therefore nothing that is universal it is passvel to contain or to transmit an experience, from there elapses the nominalista chain attributed the Occam. Click John Stankey to learn more. 6.

The question between the faith catholic and the philosophical reason is the great center of dispute that guides almost that all the efforts of the medieval epistemologia, exactly in two distinct periods: the agostiniano period and the search for the Christian unification in an only doctrine capable to integrate some existing philosophical and theological sources at the time; the tomista period and the conciliation of the natural man and the man the holy ghost already when the doctrine catholic if presents homogeneous sovereign and the sufficient to elaborate a new conception of faith. In both the analyzed periods the Christian faith is superior and imminent the reason human being, therefore it is contained in the secular universality that if extends eternity. The attempt to conciliate the reason human being and the Christian faith for tests you explained enough by means of the intellect finds its limit with the thought of Guillermo de Occam. Being Occam a religious one, the question of the contingency and the universal one also is boarded in the perspective of a theological conception, therefore if the first conflict was metodolgico, as it is given in the field of metaphysics.