Hello guys. I spent these two weeks intensifying the final reading of Sloterdijk and finally finished Foams. I will put here a general text about the last chapters because they are very explanatory and well divided, so it would be bad to comment or describe what he says in each subdivision. But at the end of the book I was well pleased. The best part of the book is the beginning and the beginning part in 2 - Indoors. The part about human islands is interesting, but as I said before it’s kind of 2 or 3 themes that begin to subdivide. At the end of this journey, it would still be with the first book Bubbles, secondly Foams and third globes. Although at times it is kind of boring because of the volume of the books, I think Sloterdijk did indeed create a good vision and would even say very particular and singular. I believe that in the future many people will return to Sloterdijk on various subjects.
This final part constitutes: B - Cellular construction, Egospheres and autocontainer until Retrospective - Of a dialogue about the oxymoron.
Sloterdijk in this final part talks a lot about the inner spaces where the man starts to move from a small space to something bigger like Assemblies, Parties, Shareholders, Meetings, Unions, etc. He says that the autistic person does not have the "inner spatiality" that makes him fit to be his own company. The self-supplementing structure of the individual has deep anthropological-mediatic roots and can only be explained in terms of media history. The minimal formal condition of self-supplementation consists in the fact that the individual in question is integrated into a dyad with a real or imaginary Other. The question of the social life of the isolated individual, such as that of the small group animal, homo sapiens, remains in purely individualistic form, just like the solitary inhabitant of his apartment-world where two conclusions can be drawn. One is that the individual, by himself, jokes about being the entire horde. This implies the effort of representing twelve or twenty people within their inner world, members of at least three generations. Then, in the absence of other real ones, a complete social structure has to be simulated. If we speak of alliances and symbiosis, we should note that a modus vivendi of modern "society" developed in a double rhythm. First, the decomposition of social conglomerates into individualized complex units (such as condensation and spherical encapsulation of self, the ability to adopt a position in opposition to the outside) and their recombination into cooperative sets. If we take it from the point of view of "mass", many authors especially in the twentieth century will speak in their books that "modern society is a mass" or that "populations form a mass", "mass of workers" do not look at a fact that architects and designers have realized. The entry of "mass for history" is an architectural problem. If we are in an aggregate, tight state, without opening their symbionts, modern collectives must consider the task of producing spatial conditions that support the isolation of individuals here, and their meeting in multiethnic co-operation and contemplation sets. This requires a new design approach. If we take the French Revolution, we will see that the activists of the revolts could only meet in buildings of the Old Regime or in public space of the cities, especially the squares in front of large real estate. What would one day misjudge the so-called "architecture of revolution". Projects not mature at the time of an emancipation of the cultural conception of space and its geometric formations. The first act of speaking of the bourgeois takeover of power had as its architecture the National Constituent Assembly. The place of supremacy of political power, whose concept was taking shape, where it would never be undone, and could take shape anywhere and in the most fundamental moments of its making. What is in a way something from Hegel with his phenomenology of spirit and Wittgenstein in saying that "culture is a rule of order or presupposes a rule of order." For this field of action and such rules Sloterdijk calls nomotopo. Sloterdijk aptly calls it the "First Constitutional Theory". The Foam taking content in Foam City or foam town. That being said, we could underline that a "revolution" or a "revolutionary event" is a process that takes place, although initially it appears to occur in an inappropriate place. Meetings, National Assemblies, Legislative Assemblies, National Conventions, Parties, commissions, forums of discussions are the revolutionary requirement of space, which in principle would only have in common the embarrassment that they had to settle in the architecture of the old order.
That being said, we could underline that a "revolution" or a "revolutionary event" is a process that takes place, although initially it appears to occur in an inappropriate place. Meetings, National Assemblies, Legislative Assemblies, National Conventions, Parties, commissions, forums of discussions are the revolutionary requirement of space, which in principle would only have in common the embarrassment that they had to settle in the architecture of the old order. It seems that the fact that the power group that emerged from it identified actively and passively with the name of its place of meeting and emanation shows the power of the spirit of the place over the gathered, a spirit of authority or transfer of authority. A symbolic weight or a constitutive (local) fact first. A constructivist specter always creeping in search of new beginnings on a shallow slab. There was never an empty republican space, it was in him that the men of the moment could be moved to future generations. Anyone who insults against something, manifests a discontent to new forms and formats of distribution of functions, subversions and roles of the existing. The revolution is a name change. Attention is drawn in this period to a phenomenon of abolition. Whether of statues, street names, sites, bridges, monarchical monuments, would be replaced by images of freedom and emancipation, the transformation of the Louvre into the first great national museum, altars to the homeland and symbols of freedom and struggle. As a result, the rooms and functions at the national level of the feudal and clerical rooms for the accommodation of representatives of the Third Estate were also changed. Rooms, offices, administration offices, places in the Assembly, tables, rooms of judgment, etc. Nothing more than local and large meeting places where representatives and represented could meet in celebration format and solemnly. The image of the mass as sovereign national people. Sloterdijk also theory about "mass society," but at times is critical of the term for him society is "foam", he uses the term temporarily to talk especially about the French Revolution. The fervor of this movement of assemblies, allowed the old models of buildings for the ones of great concentration soon returned. The arena and circus style of the Romans and the Greek amphitheaters were the sight that large concentrations needed. A model that could be realized for the "masses," gained strength in the face of the celebration and feast of the Federation, the confederations of patriots who had joined forces to defend against counterrevolutionary intrigues. Celebration of the day of the taking of the Bastille (July 14, 1790 on the Champ de Mars).
The figure of Talleyrand was consummated in the image of priest in the master of mass ceremonies - "masses." The emergence of the media politician as showmaster and director of consensus. The rebirth of the stadium and the idea of Olympism is also very important. In serious studies of Modernity we shall see that modern totalitarianism is nothing more than a product of the stage. We recall the idea of antropotecnics de fonotopo. The agitation that the assembled cause, gives rise to a phantom of unanimity, a "general sounding will". The plebs and the plebiscite of noise. Sloterdijk recalls Gabriel de Tarde when speaking that in his theory the "social state of the human being is a hypnotic or somnambulist." The shouting of the stadium crowds reveals a mimetic excitement, excitement of "sound gestures" and their amplified return on a larger scale Massively. Elias Canetti on the other hand, in Mass and Power would speak that the characterization of the visual and architectural conditions of a stadium, is the mass like ring. An acoustic fascination that results from the meeting about it. As public agitators, the men who dictate the encounters know how to use the power of music. There an event becomes a truth. In the nineteenth century we would see an amount of controlled ceremonial forms where "societies" would revitalize this notion of arena and stage. If we speak of witnesses of the revolution and place for them to happen, in the twentieth century new impulses for large agglomerations and concentrations should be collected architecturally.
Sloterdijk (2006, pp. 476-477):
Passwords in the history of collectors are called the Olympic Games, the Russian Revolution and fascism. What unites this heterogeneous trinity is the common challenge of developing great interiors for present and mobilized multitudes in order to manage their capacity for reaction through stage-centered illusions. It is true that at the height of Modernity the art of social synthesis was only exercised as if it were an indirect; but this does not exclude that the direct meetings of the multitude in their symbiotic hours demand the intervention of the more explicit organized knowledge. This is pragmatized in the exploration of the great collectors. From the appearance and establishment of such macro-interiors one can know that the type of construction analyzed by Walter Benjamin, the passages - in which he sought the deep idea of the interior of the nineteenth century: the paradoxical synthesis of intimacy and public world of commodity- , no longer play any key role in understanding the space-creating processes of contemporary society. As far as their mercantile dimension is concerned, the passages have been replaced by commercial centers outside urban complexes or by pedestrian zones of the city center: recent architecture only takes them into account as historicizing quotations.
With regard to the creative possibilities of space in the twentieth century scenario, a range of abstractions of stadiums and apartments take over the surroundings. In both we see the foaming happen. An annihilator of individual space, of the multitude in large containers. In the other, a preponderance of civilizational scumming of “society” in crowded egospheres and egotechniques. A come and go, an exchange. A dialectic of modernization. The possibility of a center no longer subsists. Resistance in favor of the midpoint develops its own centers and attractions of the great multitude. In stadiums, arenas, General Assembly, buildings that will appear all over the world we will see a recentralizing trend for political and cultural motivations of the twentieth century. With postmodernity, we have seen a decomposition of the historical climate and the lack of a midpoint. The desire of the center allied itself with the formation and the will of plenary meeting. The Olympic idea gains strength in the “desespiritualization of ascesis”, that is, in the exercises of improvement and self-improvement. For this, nothing better than to revive the Olympic idea as a modern ideology with its rather powerful ritual force allied with the physical concentration of masses. This scenario would also converge with the spirit of competition of the economic society. A modern concept of freedom says that anything that strengthens competition should be allowed. An idea of "athletic rebirth" at all. This Modern conversion would be a machine to produce winners and victories and make the spectators the witnesses between the one who is the first and the others. A Modern psycho-political function would be potentialized with neoliberalism and the capitalist market in full development. A scenario of struggle and suffering that represent the dream of transforming the trivial body into a statue capable of wonders and surreal performance. The figure of the winner’s podium would be a field of emanation of strong political and racial energy. A young democracy ended up imitating colossal Roman constructions as a vitalist gesture in a “national revolution” with tragic-sentimental connotations. In Berlin, the first athletic rebirth took place under national-socialist fabrics. Similarities between the fascist organization for a major sporting event or event converged to an ideological (national-socialist) core and with the feeling of convening a special place for the athletic elite of youth. The Führer cult corresponds to the idea of a popular plenum, it can be philosophically coherent as a figure of the death of the old western centrism. Olympism would have the slogan that all power comes from a healthy body and are. Thus, Fascist-type legitimacy would have the pinch of popular biological aristocracy of an Olympic character. Hitler’s populist-style meetings were not celebrated to represent a program or repertory, the program itself is in the idea of a meeting and a pretext for convening the crowd to be together (national-revolutionary). A self-themed or monothematic totalitarianism is the result of the submission of this “party organization”, of the presentation of the collectors-organizers and of the great media that they drag the press, propaganda center, radio, and judiciary with themes that sounded interesting to them. A National Socialism as a city of general party assemblies already existed when at the time the Berlin Olympic Games took place. Political centrism outside the sportsmanship led to a breakdown of the autonomous personality and the banality of evil.
Victory and success was to be reunited. A tendency towards generalizing self-inclusion for the complementation and coupling of the great event with its transmission through the mass medium. One would see the organization of symbiotic “masses” within modern macro interiors linked to a mediatic plurality in connection with them. From this point of view, Hitler’s war was a continuation of festivals with different means. Games like cults for compromise and fallen Germans, deceived with the victory of World War 1. Nazi ideology engendered a German corporate identity. Hitler, Goebbels & Co., had a core cult of the dead. Little by little the subjects captured by the nationalist ideals were leaving aside the times of celebrations and celebrations. In its place we would have the constant and lasting capture of German public opinion. The capture in all possible centers, business organizations, communal organizations, associations and neighborhoods for the stress of cooperation of war and the enthusiasm generated by the media, where the news were of success. The mass media or mass media has been a gigantic effectiveness of the modern national state to large groups 80 million people, 200 million people and consequently because the strength of the union of such collectives cannot come from the collective as a whole. It has to come from outside of what this collective indicates that corresponds to the substance that continuously excites, the “news topics”. A circle of the national collective where the news is nothing more than proposals of excitement. Who wants to learn, improve, paint, run, work, enter into learning processes should stick to a group of professionals, whether elites or ordinary. All this has a place. A circle of meetings. The contemporary scenario will present companies in public relations and business agencies and event management services, in holiday organization firms, analytical offices, telecommunication agencies, political leaders that emanate a message. A that realities as self-spatializations of “societies” are done in a multifocal way. Recently Trump and Kim Jong-un met at the Capella Hotel luxury hotel in Singapore which sits on Sentosa Island. The island was singled out as the preferred option by the North Koreans, as it was a more isolated point than the others. At this hotel, the Leaders gathered in a special room to discuss North Korea’s nuclear program and its end, the newspapers defined the meeting as a “historic meeting.” Both signed a denuclearization agreement. Another “historic summit” took place months before, the two Korean leaders on the border between North and South, where they both pledged to seek the “complete denuclearization” of the peninsula and the end of the conflict that has been raging since the 1950s. still if we catch the recent case of democratization and opening of Cuba where the Assembly of Cuba approved a proposal of reform of the Constitution and opened popular consultation between August and November. The Reformation that opens the right to the private property and the gay marriage was approved this Sunday 22 from July 2018 and now, will go through three months of popular consultation and should still be voted in a national referendum.
In the scenario of the common space between the three poles of modern life and the common space we will have: work, housing and public space and collector. The imposition of traffic and communication (check-in, Wi-fi) pushes city dwellers for lightness, for thin, fast, smooth products. The change of place and flow of data and information is what the electronic impulse gives us. Metaphors about virtual cities, online territory, Bitcoins, networks and telematic communication, where urbanism transcends materiality, corporality and density of space into a medium without message, since the medium itself is the message (angelic processes of traffic). It presents the process of foamy character and urban condensation. The spatial constitution (real-surreal) in the macrofoams (citizen-only; the idea of a cell or the immunization system as the single-apartment) is best observed only when we realize that there is a meeting of meeting and non-meeting places. They experiment with new procedures for the purpose of a better synthesis of "society" in concentration spaces. We will see a new description of the urban space if it produces like stilts, systems of pillars, new hinged spatial articulations, artificial meetings, so that yes, the space can exist. Coexistence between your peers and things. The projective energies run through the idea of towering, leaving the ground. An architecture whose movement has a will to feudal power or the upward metaphysical movement of existence. Levitate, lift your feet off the ground and overcome gravity, a configuration of the excerpts of the verticality of a posthistory. Between ancient buildings and buildings there is no dialectic, but something like an overlay. Something superimposed on the air in the idea of pillar: the basic technology of posthistory (a second Babylon). In this new, typically postmodern, off-the-ground world, there is a complexity with political consequences similar to past events. Ungovernability. The Neo-Babylonians are existentialists because they live in a world after alienated labor. His contact with reality is produced on the construction of environments, atmospheres and moving spaces. We must yield to a new psychogeographic description of space with the mood of mood states. Constant Anton Nieuwenhuys perhaps was the greatest visionary only twentieth century with his projects. He is a true analyst of atmospheric poly "society" with a quality that is his ability to generate artificial atmospheres of dwellings and their human practices.
Sloterdijk (2006, pp. 502-503):
Given that its utopia, following the social fantasies of the Situationist International, conceives of the new "society" as a form of coexistence of happy unemployed, without its city the atmospheric milieu of coexistence, which otherwise is considered as a byproduct, appears for the first time as the main product. (Guy Debord, with whom Constant had cooperated since the late 1950s, had spoken of urban "neighborhoods of feeling" and "realities of feeling" in 1957). Neo-Babylonians are the first inhabitants of an explicit aphro-political structure: the creator of a city that unfolds on the earth as the exuberant colony of nomad artists on stilts and which consists exclusively of receptacles of atmosphere and individualized reversible environments. The content of this city is the history of the art of citizens. As far as its forms of appearance are concerned, the idea that Constant foresaw the aesthetic post-historical scrap of Mad Max is imposed. The Neo-Babylonian aphropolis - fully shown in 1974 in the Hague Municipal Museum - visualizes with the gesture of exposing non- authoritarian (that is, not thought to be realized) a possible urban form of that "social plastic" that Beuys had postulated in his metapolitical discourses. Mark Wigley notes, in view of the controversial meddling of the situationists in the events of May 1968: "The atmosphere becomes the basis of political action. The accessory, apparently ephemeral, mobilizes as an active sentinel in the concrete struggle. As a ghostly end point of such fights, New Babylon is a gigantic Jukebox of atmospheres, of which only make use of a completely revamped society. "
As conceptual experiment Constant shows the coexistence of "creative unemployed" in the collective flow space that leads to a result in which every human being is an artist, an installation artist (I-designer), where environments emanate from an identification with consummation of life. The power to build and draw the environment without being subject to previous sediments and wall papers. A premise that tells us to abandon the primacy of the past and the dictatorship of scarcity, in order to think of liberating the chain of productive forces for the suppression of any alienated work. The key to understanding the New Babylon project is to think about creating an artificial paradise in the form of a climbing garden for men eager for inner creation and inner world space. The crystallized paradise is a garden, because they offer a total interior in which all the spaces are air conditioned creating an artificial lighting and atmosphere. The being-there inserted in an architectural rhizome. Being within the facility, a design without homeland and without fixed rooms as constant movement unplanned. It is permissible to think that in the future "natures" or "nature" or biomes are less and less "outside" or outside than in the great studies of a civilization. The idea of encapsulation is dominant in the twentieth century and large scale for the integration of larger and larger complexes, perhaps even in the landscape sense or external citizens. The city each passing day is a constant conversion into an operative unit of the three modes. The space station, the greenhouse and the human island.
In the final part of the book Sloterdijk talks primarily about a philosopher and anthropologist Arnold Gehlen and Galbraith and his considerations on contemporary society. It was Galbraith who said that in the opulent society one cannot make any valid distinction between luxuries and needs. In the Opulent Society of 1958 he says that there was a time when poverty was a determining factor of everything. Nowadays it is not anymore. It may be that the serious problems of "society" come much more from the superabundance that we still cannot quite understand. It may be that she endangers her own wealth. We can define conservatism as the political form of melancholy. Its form in Europe was seen after 1789 as a fact that arose from the retrospective trip to the unrecoverable goods, forms of life and arts in pre-bourgeois times. It is conservative who refuses to stop believing that the good and the noble are linked to the place and the unrepeatable. For the vulgar, on the contrary, the principle of majority and repetition suffices. If we speak of optimistic conditions, of improvement of the conditions of life, the conservative puts itself in a cover. Is not hoping or assuming the best in the future no longer the search for the wrong direction? The idea of progress which for him is never more than an acceleration of flight before the good, which becomes unreachable. Tocqueville had already spoken in his day that the kind of detractor thought of his own time and worried about him, believed that all evil was inseparable from the successes of the new. The right has always been the party of weight and incorrigibility. The land that the conservatives inhabit are the long, the defective ones, those of necessity and those of charges. If they mistakenly say that Peter Sloterdijk is conservative, we should note that moderns are convinced that they are on a path to optimizing their status and levels of immunity by taking that too in a political field, conservatives soon open their ears. It seems they have no sympathy for optimism. The step forward and progress are not associated with them. It is not surprising that the golden age of conservative sentiment would be seen in the early nineteenth century as a time of maintenance, the so-called "Restoration Era." This illusion that it was possible to be secure in the face of progress dissolves. Who lived before social issues knows nothing of the harshness of life. If conservatism is melancholy, it is because they invented the "sad science" of the human being and the economy which, since the beginning of the nineteenth century, has been the continuum of most discourses of modernization. Which makes me think of the initial thesis that he had said that Sloterdijk though he seems a conservative is not as Zizek says.
Another conservative like Adorno would condemn this idea, to follow a dark vision that followed industrial pauperism. For him, not even the bastard freed themselves from the disfigurement of the world by the abstraction of exchange. Everything would be coined similarly. Life would be subaltern and corroded by the subjection of things in the expression of price. The form of an enlightened conservatism. An event in the twentieth century would present the idea of overcoming mass material poverty in the first world countries. But a certain pessimism said that economic wealth would never be enough to put an end to the poverty complex. The Frankfurt School with its critical theory presented the idea that the enrichment of the multitude could only lead to more misery only that with new formats, capitalism would be the change of the deception. It was founded on the idea of homo pauper based on human nature (Arnold Gehlen). What matters now is to take a turn toward well-being, opulence, comfort, pampering, comfort, lightness. With the collapse of socialism and barbarism of the twentieth century, a period that consisted of a war between totalitarian ideologies of the ethnic-nationalist and socialist-internationalist types and the defensive victory of democratic capitalism, the new world confrontation would present a horizon of good -establish the inclusion of the “masses” in the distribution of wealth. We would see practical effects of day-to-day modernization such as increasing scientific research, technical inventions, business life, expansion of the health and insurance system, labor rights, social and labor benefits that would enable people with a certain change in family structures and in their mentalities, in a search for hope, based on the idea of longevity and falling birth rates. The progressive factors allowed an individualism to a situation where the pauperism gave rise to the well-being. The social field had created dozens of platforms for popular ambitions. The events of the twentieth century could only be interpreted by an era of evasion of modern “society” as the definitions of the era of poverty and effort. The beginning of various intellectual works began to adopt the vocabulary “consumer society”, “living society”, “society of spending”, “culture of appearance”, among others that would serve as an early diagnosis of the times to come as the climate of the Society. Our space has abandoned the burdens of poverty, of psychosemantics of necessity, and of Miserabilistic International. The anthropological-semantic turn should be the emancipation of penury in the face of a novelty and a political interpretation of wealth. Galbraith’s Affluent Society provided the discussion of talking about a rich “society” of its wealth with moral and ethical implications. There would be tensions for the well-being of well-being. All those economic and political crises had one destiny, cynicism. Contemporary civilization knows how to protect all its members from accidents, illnesses, misfortunes, poverty, failure, and unemployment. The suffering under the theories of exploitation and alienation would not be more dramas of the present nor guides to representations. The lie of misery is no longer sufficiently told or believed. An opposition to resentment and penury would draw an existence of the free spirit (Nietzsche), one that is naturally rich as a wealth manifested by the primacy of giving, the primacy of giving (economically, morally, culturally).
Concerns of this nature were already beginning to arouse the interest of theorists like Herbert Marcuse in 1955 about Sigmund Freud (Pulsational Structure and Society) as one of the first glimpses of a reality in the opposite direction of what was called “non-repressive culture.” “Society” would be free from the spell of repression of drives and of others. His considerations lay in putting aside the psychology of homo pauper, since it had been described almost unanimously by theories of the instinct. A basic interpretation of the spoiled and enriched human being interpreted through appetites, flow of desires, mood, waste. A reaction of the conservative revolution in the first half of the twentieth century emerged as ideology. A crutch for support in an attempt to falsify freedom in need and wealth in poverty. The best way to protect luxury is by denying it is luxury. Post-war situations in the West after two world wars for peacetime, citizens after these events would witness a greenhouse effect of comfort. A growing vision of consumption for the superfluous was present. The acquisitive capacity and frivolity of the “masses” would lead to a dominant mood. The glitzy consumption of luxury or fashion as well as the automobile and the dream of home and car. The strong expansion of free time affects all psychosocially. The use of this free time would be made in physical, aesthetic, personal, financial, hobbies, travel, tourism, home appliances, penicillin, electricity and oil improvements would have been previously unseen levels. Things that look like Brazil sadly have walked backwards. Sloterdijk concludes by saying that this situation of penury could only result in descriptions in all spheres of pessimism and an import of negativities. A typical ideological context. A context of exploration of the peripheries by the centers. The mercantile forms such as the habit of cheap import (misery) as raw material and of making it into high value products for the consumer market is today seen as a great success in the first world countries. Meanwhile the idea of pessimism in the third world facing the wealth of the West is taken on negative balances. If we even think about First World social welfare and the poverty of the underdeveloped presents a framework of results of injustices against the southern hemisphere. What they think of is a kind of conservation of misery as a conservative spirit of misery, effort, poverty, negator of luxury and well-being has been reversed. Pauperism can be described as synonymous with lack. An ontology that goes beyond economic or political aspects, making lack a sort of “negative essence,” something like a being of scarcity. The human essence would be in this context, its subjectivity. A crooked psyche as a form of human poverty as a historical, social and existential manifestation (products, opportunities and resources) seen, for example, in the works of Arnold Gehlen. A conservative of the twentieth century with Hegelian traditions on the right. Gehlen takes this ideology as a philosophical anthropology. As exponents of the twentieth century would join him with a “pessimistic syndrome” names such as Luhmann, Smith, Adorno, Freud, Lacan, Schmitt and Herder. A growing conservatism based on the deficit man. The determination of homo pauper as anthropology of needs. Conservative moods and a lightening paralysis of things built the deeply poor animal as an active, reflective human being in their culture. Sloterdijk sees man not as being-de-need, but to be rich. Neotenia produces the rich hominid and homo sapiens richer still. The conservative Adorno would never endorse such a thesis, perhaps he would have appreciation for Gehlen’s considerations. Thus, Adorno does not have a theory for the society of abundance. If a predominance in the twentieth century would have to be that of scarcity and the precarious view of man, few authors would follow a sociology in the mold of Galbraith. When Adorno, along with Horkheimer, produced the texts on the “Dialectic of the Enlightenment,” the society of abundance and individualism we know today were not in vogue. This “model” of the Affluent Society would only be better observed in the late 1950s. For Adorno, individualism presented itself as a loss, something that “managed society” and “late capitalism” had either destroyed or eliminated. possibility. Adorno had a utopia of return. His correct world was the ideal world of a time of capitalist society in which mass society had not appeared. Today’s world is a “mass society” without a doubt, but, as Sloterdijk puts it, we are also in that society that puts the individual as seeing himself as more real than all that is around him. The situation of opulence does not seem to enter in any way on the agenda of intellectuals, who always believe in secular forms of seeing man in the Original Sin and the Fall. If to property Rousseau would be a sin, to think other forms of this would be a sin as well. It is precisely because of his organic underdevelopment that man exhibits his technical potential, so it is precisely this compensatory ability that allowed him to become Homo sapiens and Homo faber.