ROUSSEAU, the FREEDOM AND the WORK Cleber Gimenes Freitas ' ' in my opinion the society is so natural to the species human being as the decrepitude for the individual and of that to the peoples the arts, the laws and the governments are necessary, as the crutches is for the old ones. The difference all is where the oldness state elapses solely of the nature of the man and of the society it elapses of the human sort, not immediately, as you want, but solely, I proved as it, thanks to the aid of certain exterior circumstances that can happen or not, or, at least, happening or later more early, consequentemente, to hurry or delaying the progress. Innumerable on these circumstances they depend exactly on the will of the man; I saw myself obliged, to establish a perfect parity, to assume in the individual the power to speed up its oldness as the species has to delay its. Having, therefore, the society state an extreme term, which the men can want to arrive more early or later, is not useless to show the danger to them to go so fast and the miseries of a condition that take as the perfection of the species. Get more background information with materials from Campbell Soup Inc.. ' ' 1 FREEDOM: ' ' A KNIFE OF TWO GUMES' ' In the extracted stretch of the Letter to Mr. Philopolis, Rousseau warns that the sped up progress of sciences, the arts, the laws and the governments would move away the man from the nature it would lead and it to a precocious oldness. Being the free man to badly make good or a use of the facultieses that receives potentially, he is it also responsible it for the majority of males they afflict that it in the life in society. From this, alert Rousseau how much to the perigos of the fast human perfectioning. .

Without saying of the modifications and damages that homo to faber cause to the environment, arrasando mountains, arrebentando rocks, arroteando the lands and raising on the enormous ground its construes.6 ‘ ‘ The man is born exempts, and for all the part meets it ferros.’ ‘ 7 This phrase illustrates the idea of that the work, we see as it in the society, is not a necessity imposed for the nature and that the proper man, exempts and perfectvel, is who produces the chains arrest that it. Today, the technological progress allowed to delegate to the machines the activities that demand an extreme physical effort, providing to the man a bigger free time, that it spends prisoner to the desgastantes intellectual concerns. Same the increase of the longevity, in a life repleta of schedules, rules, gates and all type of impediments which the individual if submits daily, does not seem to mean an improvement, but yes a species of slavery or drawn out suicide. .

He possesss the espontaneidade, the violence, the ferocity and also the enthusiasm and herosmo of the primitive beings. In the citation of Le Bon it appears the organization idea that Freud looks for to understand better in the workmanship of McDougall, therefore this distinguishes an organized group from a group not organized. McDougall describes an organized group in well similar way to the one of Le Bon, not showing that such group is excessively emotional, sugestionvel, extremely incapable of any form that is not simplest and imperfect of the forms of reasoning, naked of apt sense of responsibility and to be lead by the conscience of its proper force. What it interested Freud in the workmanship of McDougall had been the characteristics of an organized group, that if to take care of to some conditions as to have certain degree of existence continuity, to interact with other similar groups, to have traditions and defined structure, express in the specialization and differentiation of the functions of its constituent, the group can brighten up the psychological disadvantages of the formations of group not organized. For Freud, these conditions pointed for McDougall had as factor of group organization, in the truth are the forms to keep in the individual its individual characteristics that if had extinguished for the group formation. In the workmanship ' ' The psychology of the masses and analysis of eu' ' Freud approaches the individual psychology of social psychology, therefore it identifies its theory displayed in the myth of the father primevo, described in ' ' Totem and Tabu' ' of 1913/14, that she explains the mechanisms of functioning of the mind human being, inside of the human groupings, thus the expectation of Freud was to prove that they are the libidinais bows that characterize a group. In such a way it is important to detach that the identification constitutes the original form of emotional bow with an object, in the case the leader who would represent the father primevo of horda primeva. .

Then, any that is the consequence of our acts, is only to we ourselves credited: ' ' What it wants that happens, it is through me that it has of acontecer.' ' (Sartre, 1986, P. 214). It corroborates with this opinion in the stretch of the workmanship Suspended Penalty: ' ' The future of all the men: they had constructed it with its proper hands, slowly, during anos.' ' (Sartre, 1960, P. 35). This responsibility for the proper acts, so commented for Sartre in diverse workmanships, still is associated with the direction of the life, the explanation for the doubts regarding the convivncia: ' ' They are free: they had gained the war in its time and have good conscience. Of this defeat, that is not of them, accepted, although everything, the responsibility. (…) Reencontra, suddenly, what it loses: the direction of vida.' ' (Sartre, 1968, P.

417). The responsibility, although to elucidate the direction of the life, she is not acolhedora. In contrast, it transmits the oppression sensation: ' ' It felt oppressed me by the weight of responsabilidade.' ' (Sartre, 1968, P. 39). But also it demonstrates that the responsibility is atrelada our lives, also as society, and it cannot be abandoned: ' ' One hundred million free consciences, each one of them seeing walls, familiar tips of cigarettes, faces and constructing its proper destination on account of proper responsabilidade.' ' (Sartre, 1960, P. 234). In this way, many consciences desiring the same thing implies in the event of this thing, as a war, for example: ' ' Thus, all we it fazemos' ' (Sartre, 1960, P. 233), mentioning the responsibility to it of any war. Thus, the man wants the freedom, he wants but it of a concrete form. E, because of the commitment and of the discovery of the other, the man is obliged to want, not only its freedom, but also of the others.