The ability of a citizen or a citizen of a lower or uneducated level to report his illness or mental or physical defect is minimal, so often he is even ashamed to speak openly about it, so you must lie. Non-compliance is explained by the desire to use foreign language, someone else's experience. This contradiction creates a "necessity" for lying. A similar situation occurs not only in the field of medicine. Popularly speaking, lies for failure. For example, this is done in order to fail in the army or receive unemployment benefits.

While these are unpleasant things, they are not very rare. Perhaps then you should not talk about lies, but about deceit. Although everyone understands the importance of morality, he does not want to follow its requirements. Does it mean to be polite and pathetic, even if it is contrary to other positions or values? the best way for the individual is to lie for himself. The child lies to boast or leave, adults do this not only for others, but also for themselves. "I will begin new life from Monday" - a phrase familiar to many. Almost 80 percent of a lecture is self-evident, psychologists say.

In the domestic sense, people want to avoid uncomfortable situations or conflicts. A lot of people talk about their health as both older people and people. But even here there is little truth. Therefore, it is not easy, and sometimes impossible, to “talk” with a doctor who is lying. Quite often we want to deceive ourselves, to convince us not to do anything else, to fire disabled people. Old people often do not cope with illnesses, they do not see real health problems. The circulation statistics, reporting on achievements do not reflect the real threats to society.

Western culture is the opposite Greek culture. This has two implications. First, it is an exception to Greek culture. The second consequence is the inability of the Greeks to become a state - in spite of their lust. We owe this knowledge primarily to the work of Costas Papaioannou, Cornelius Castoriadis and Costas Axelos. The ontological knowledge of their work, the knowledge of the ontological asymmetry of Western and Greek civilization is emphasized by Ms. Mangiro in the above book to make it a compass of political orientation.

Based on this, the ontological analysis of the West offers us something unexpected, at least for me. Ontological political analysis is also an innovation that introduces the book into political thought. Its application to the various chapters of the book proves impressive praise. This is one of the very rare books that introduce the reader to the path of true political thinking.

Ontological infrastructure of the West. The basis of the cultural field involves the assumption of one of the following three ontological options. Latin choice. We are not a being, but an expression of being, a convention. German choice. Both individuals and we coexist as beings different levels.

Greek choice. The linguistic attack on the three options is justified by the fact that the European peoples who built their culture on them were respectively Latin, German-speaking, and Greek-speaking. But let's take a closer look at the substantive definition of the three options.

The ancient Latins deified ours. Rome is a divine entity. Its despotic social hierarchy is sacred and inviolable. As a unique and eternal holy being, Rome demands world domination. His political ideology is Unesellalism. The ontological homologue of Latin is also us of Afro-Asiatic despotism such as Ancient Egypt and Ancient China. Their counterpart is also the Jewish ontological monism of the "chosen people". Only his own liberalism is eschatological.

On the ontological counterpoint of Rome, the rocks of the German military tribes appear. We, under the casual leadership of a military leader - a kelch, are based on extreme individualism. It continues as a feudalist and ends as a capitalist, and today, as "neoliberal" and "neoconservative", claims to be "global governance". His Course of Time: The Ontological Monophony of the Ego.

Their meaning is able to understand this because we live in their polarization. But the third ontological position cannot be understood in the same way, because its culture has long been destroyed. Because today's bearish cousins ​​are simply unthinkable. And this is only theoretical. Our key provides two key definitions of Aristotle: "Man is a political animal." And this is "a man alone, a beast or a god." It is no coincidence, Mrs. Mangiro says, that the Germans translated the first definition as "social animal." They equated "political" with "social".

However, they nullified what the Greeks were an ontological difference between human and animal sociability. Thus, the translators and "heirs of Greek civilization" thus became Aristotle's second definition: for a Person, as a "beast", which, in his opinion, is an original being, that is, a "god".

This implies that Latin is dominated by the double compulsion of nature, so God-Law and the Germans dominate the "beast within them". It is tragic that the already established nullification of the ontological difference between human and animal sociality emphasizes termite nests as a model of human communication. Consider how incredibly high the intellectual intelligence of the "social system" is, so that "the system works by itself." Without the need for thought, ingenuity and initiative of each person - the termite.

Compare this with the autonomous development of the Technosphere and the replacement of socialism with its impersonal mechanisms. One sees everything else that is social, and the other sees people. They are simply doomed to exist in an impersonal - inhuman relation - self-sufficient social life animals. Nietzsche's famous phrase: "God is dead." In essence, he says that the "divine" self-understanding of the Latin "We" has been completely transplanted from the body of his despotic hierarchy into the German "We" as the self-respect of the Ego. As a result, the structure of the German We fully engages and becomes an autonomous and apparently uncontrolled Technological system that we already know about.

In Greek culture, Ms. Mangiro points out what is the basis of meanings in the Common Word of the human world, generates a love for getting out of the general biological rationality of the human animal. This gives rise to love for Pauline, where “well-being” fulfills the inexorable and indivisible unity of We and Ego, without humiliating one or the other, achieving a break with the zoological. This is the "level - the path of our existence", which Castoriadis calls the "institutionalized social imaginary" and approaches it through the "creation" of individual energy in a person.

Where "creation" means "work for the municipality". Collective self-creation. Here animal life becomes political life. The psychosocial acquisition of ontological denaturation corresponds to "being in the world." In "the path of every administration". Where, according to Empedocles, from many and from one. That is why, at the city level, a person is a "project". The fundamental definition of this humanistic ontology, insofar as it transcends the polarization of the other two, creating a third level of existence, can be attributed to the correlative term "Triadic ontology".

It is actually an ontology, with the ancient meaning of the word. We have keyword wisdom: "Two metaphysics and ontology"! Our experience from the past and modernism from postmodernism in recent times has shown the reality of ontological nihilism. In this sense, "ontological" nihilism is the "dump" of cultures and at the same time, perhaps, the "way" of a person to another culture. It is stated that we are in the planned political "dislocation". With a systemic "breakdown of collective identity." It is now observed in a way that happened in other critical periods of Western history.

As specific attacks aimed at collapsing the culture of the ruler, as well as erecting concrete barriers in front of random free passage, the book further points out that in addition to what happens in the historical diachrony, at the same time in the same culture, the degree of socialization people will vary to the point of "not absorbing the individual" from society. Both on an individual level and a collective level, due to a failed social organization. Ontological History of Modernity.

The book tells, after all, how the dominant ontological choice of the modern West was, how the subordination of Latin to German, while the systematic exclusion of the Greek ontological choice. Some key points of this course are as follows.

Thus we have an ancient Greek-region, but with universal implications, two drops of a dominant ontological level. Greek meanings, surviving, went immunity against malicious challenge, with the strengthening of the new hegemony, as good Christian meanings. Here the author goes beyond Castoriadis, for whom Byzantium was the red cloth. That it contributed to Greek Christianity at the level of central significance is not, according to this interpretation, a "new ontology", but the fact that the Greek fathers of mercenary Christianity, in accordance with their Greek ontological ideas, embody in Orthodoxy.

As he had just done Augustine in the Latin realm, hiring Christianity over the Latin collectivist ontology to make universalism - Catholicism. Moreover, the respective Germans will adopt Christianity in accordance with their own individualistic ontology, as originally Arianism and Protestantism subsequently.

After that, thanks to the extreme "pragmatic mutation" We are British due to the "adventurers" of the Norman Conquerors, capitalism will do it. That is, as you say, Walter Benjamin, a "parasite" on the body of Western Christianity. "Pure Worship" Mammon. But let's get back to the conflicts of ontological "plate tectonics".