We will make brief analysis refers to in it to this respect and we will present a reflection where two personages will exert of philosophical simple form and at the same time, the act to think. When examining the history of the humanity, we will notice with the simplicity of a child, that we have enormous difficulty in dialoguing with the human beings. To know to speak, is not synonymous of good use of the language. I can speak well and express me of bad form.
Also I can express me and not dominate in correct way the language well. On the other hand, I can have the cited qualities and to be highly ignorant when I am to dialogue with other people. The Michael J. Fox Foundation wanted to know more. After all, how many people would support to be some minutes to dialogue cordial with Scrates in old Greece? (to also see the workmanship Of Magistro, Saint Augustin). It is not question to earn or to lose a dialogue, must only be accumulated knowledge with it. It does not have to be competition question, but yes, of episteme philosophical. The old ignorant phrase: ‘ nis viemo here shovel baby or shovel cunvers? ‘ That is, the drink finishes being more important that the dialogue, that the human being in itself. Signal of decay? I go to give a simple philosophical tip to them without commitment. If it will be to leave to only drink, some does not have necessity to take plus somebody or some.
It drinks and ready. nthal Northland to learn more. If to want somebody to only dialogue, in this in case that it is good for taking somebody or some. In case that contrary, you run the risk to be speaking alone. A freudiano psychoanalyst can not support to see this scene.