During the time of metaphysics, the history of the being is repassed by one pressed time essence. A space is not commanded nor parallel to this situated time nor inside of it. The relation that comes of metaphysics and that it looks for to penetrate in the reference of the truth of the being to the human being is conceived as understanding. The understanding is the played static project, wants to say, the insistent project in the scope of the opened one. The preface of Being and Time, in the first page of the treated one, locks up with the phrases: ' ' The concrete elaboration of the question of the direction of ' ' ser' ' it is the objective of the present work. Its provisory end and to supply an interpretation of the time as horizon of all possible understanding of ser' ' The philosophy could not bring easily a clearer test to be able it of the esquecimento of the being where all it disappeared? esquecimento that, however, if became and remained the challenge inherited for the thought of Being and Time? of what sonmbula security with that it passed for high the authentic and only question of Being and Time. Being that metaphysics says what is the being while the being.
Metaphysics if puts into motion in the scope of n He n. Metaphysics, however, represents the entity of the being in two ways: of a side the totality of the being while such, in the direction of the traces most general (n Kathlou, Koinn); of another one, however, and the same, the totality of the being while such, in the direction of the supreme being and therefore the holy ghost (n Kathtou, akrtaton, theion). a>. In Aristotle the desvelamento of the being while such properly was projected in this double direction (vide Metaphysical, books XI, V and X).
It has of if imagining that with the time the two principles would not obtain to take care of the general expectations due to its limitation in only satisfying what he is more basic in the relations. The conviviality is known that human being does not restrict itself to the justice slight knowledge and yes to the search for indispensable corporeal properties to its survival (foods, housing, vestments) and to get these resources the fight would be inevitable. So that the principles considered for Rawls if keep firm, it would be necessary that the goods of the nature equitable were distributed or exactly enough so that, in scarcity, did not generate the competition; the right to the property immediately would have to be enclosed to the one of basic freedom, since it would not have necessity of fights between individuals to guarantee its land. If the beginning of basic freedom it does not contemplate the ambient, geographic conditions becomes mere theoretical. The contract is deriving of the hypothetical original position of equality, then none of the parts? had to the veil of the ignorance? it has knowledge of its ownerships until that moment, is all vacant, only guide them to the rationality. But if they possessed housings or a minimum of certainty of reason that caused such right to these existing properties previous to the contract, the parts would not go to cogitate a distribution of the same ones. In this manner the competition for territory, for space could knock down in little time the beginning of freedom, since the rationality if does not raise above of the basic necessities that must be supplied. If the justice principles are accepted in the original position and to adopt them voluntarily to the people? in the truth is this the condition? they will be really the base of the justice sense. But if the parts will have accurate notion of its situation they certainly will be used to advantage of the contingencies that possuam before the contract (RAWLS, 1997).