III Context

Is it possible to incorporate "the different" without canceling it? It seems that no, that an idea is exclusive and real, and that at the time it is available or forced to be something different, it does not admit interpellation more than in the rhetorical field , because in the real it imposes itself on any other possibility of being, it only admits to be the thing itself.

It is not idle to think that in the questions of human nature we have reached a dead end, or better, the empire of a single legitimizing thought, the outmost reason of Western thought, mainly its grammar tattooed in our DNA, marked in our body, being the body itself a sign that has become a cell, and a cell that has become a sign, there is no distinction between the human nature (body) and the human spirit, it is monstrous, because the Aristotelian duality has gone astray, and There remains only one possibility of conceiving ourselves. A context that, even ideology, commonplace, is not even a science, nor a constructed knowledge of rationality.

The mystery of man has revealed itself, real fictional animals, rational irrational beings. The real is rational and the rational is real, Hegel predicted our only possibility of feeling exclusive, of defining ourselves and knowing what we were, even preferring nothing if not, and this refuge has collapsed.

Today that placid port to which we had arrived has not ceased to be fragile, and has brought dire consequences. The outbursts roam everywhere the redoubts of human coexistence, and the spirit of Apollo refuses to die.

It was mainly Europe who ignored the Vienna of Nietzsche and Freud. This search for another way of being that Josep Casals spoke to us in Viennese affinities, implied the world of the semblance, and accepting ambivalence as the only thing that annulled the struggle of opposites: It was difficult for them to accept conceiving man as the poor subject now almost turned a stranger to himself, and as Josep Casals delves into, because it brings us back to the question of the tragic in a world without gods (without oracle), to later end with Ciorán that in Europe happiness ended in Vienna. Today they are paying the consequences of this omission, and again, the war happens in their territory, and the United States is only a spectator who will only send his warplanes to support the friend in trouble (England and France), the rest they do not matter, that they get screwed by romantics and latinos.

Europe also signed a pact with reason at all costs, and thought that it was easy from aesthetics and tolerance to solve the problem of difference and pluricultural, did not learn from the United States to superpose to diversity the wild neoliberalism of consumption, to man universal, that crushes us again and again, that with its superpowers (its sophisticated weapons) is the watchman of the world, without saying that it is only the guardian of its geopolitical interests.

Nietzsche said the man prefers to want nothing to not want, and today we reaffirm that we resist to stop "wanting nothing to not want", because "nothingness" at least was "something", although it is a cruel and unjust fiction.

Reading is polyvalent and polysemic, it is radical in the sense of learning to understand without commas or points, to be reborn from a tabula rasa that incorporates from the beginning "what is different", there is no disjunctive in human questions, false or the true, which as we can see leaves two choices that are mutually exclusive, but a conjunction, false and true that leaves us in a healthy and free contradiction, so it is not "west" or "middle east (or east)" , but "west and middle east (east)", this romantic epistemic simplicity implies a great will, that perhaps only a limit situation makes us understand, and already too late, the destruction of the world.

It is to work as I have repeatedly pointed out, in a new conceptualization of human nature that replaces it is decrepita, decadent and erroneous. And for Westerners it is to think of a tolerant Third Testament, if we want to preserve our Judeo-Christian tradition as a point of reference for our conception of the human.

We have to accept that other choices to ours, even if they are from another ideology or philosophy, that have substantiality and occupy a common place in our human and terrestrial world, citizens are from the local, that vertigo in which we have put fate on track of humanity, the globalizing process and the idea of ​​a Universal Man has failed, illusion that will never be achieved, this is worse than communism-Marxism-Leninism, because at least there was the intention of a benefit for all thinking of equality of the differences, the universal man (the armed forces of the white-skinned masters) only cares for the interests of their owners, that is why we see how millions of human beings are condemned, even before being born, to poverty and death.

We do not want to see ourselves as exclusive, different from other living beings on this planet, when we have not even exhausted our rationality and our humors, because affection and emotion have occupied a privileged place in our appreciations and capacity for distinction, the truth spits us out the face, and we can not see "how we are exploited by the empire", its glass beads (the virtual hyperspace) blind our reason, and take advantage of our passions, only this way it is understood that the edge (love) precedes the Sofia (wisdom), and that contradict our supreme principle of non-contradiction.

The man in his process of "knowing himself," is standing in an insurmountable contradiction, and that is precisely where our exit and our freedom lies. It is not a choice to use burka or not and to think about its implications and ideological and scientific debates, it is the simplicity of using it or not the only truth, it is born with it, it is on the skin, as it is, not using it. That is why talking about human rights in this issue is a fallacy of the law of majorities and power.

Human nature requires urgent debates, the discontents of the identity of man and the consequences of the kidnapping of human truth are sufficient reasons to make them.