The Lion & The Gazelle - Dialectic of enlightenment

In Africa, during the morning, a group of lions (believed to be hungry) leaves in search of their prey and, on the occasion, encountering a group of gazelles, begins to hunt. Within this context, after the necessary and proper pause for reflection - answer the following question: "All gazelles persecuted in this hunt, within the natural context of the so-called food chain, would be and/or will be handles by the lions (Leone)? ________________________________________ PREAMBLE - ABOUT THE NATURE OF DIALECTICAL PROCESS AND ABOUT THE DIRECTION OF THIS BOOK (...) At the beginning of the modern Era and/or anthropocentric, post-middle ages and/or no theocentric, behold, there are two new characters in the history of knowledge, defending opposite positions, i.e. between the idealism of Plato and the empirics of Aristotle: Descartes and Francis Bacon, respectively. While Descartes, in its maximum "I think, therefore I am", advocated, as Plato had done before, the supremacy the Spirit (idea) on Matter, Bacon, on the other hand, argued that, in the pursuit of knowledge, we needed to worry about getting rid of idols, false notions and/or ideas that have been observed for our being, to the human spirit, as if they were loved, that is, as beings that we were digging the condition of owners of ideas and were enslaved condition of mere possessed by them (ideas), giving us, however, at the same time, the illusion and/or feel that we are "hyper-aware." Later, already at the end of the modern era and/or beginning of contemporary, the clash continues: Now, however, between Hegel and Marx and/or vice versa. The axioms of Hegel are not very different from the other idealists. But, Karl Marx, were innovative, or better, revolutionary: he, Marx, created the materialist theory of History and/or better, the so-called dialectical Materialism and/or the idea of praxis, which many educators, such as Paulo Freire, ways, began after the draw also pedagogical praxis. Now, but what comes to be the principle Marxist dialectic? I do not claim to explain the thoughts of Marx, why, the same, and already explained by itself. In short, what we can say is that, he, the dialectical principle, is the same as a kind of "complexity of obvious". This is, by means of its principles is recommended, among other things, that: 1- The practice and/or material does not reduce and/or should not reduce the theory; and, that: 2- Neither the theory and/or idea must be reduced to practice. In other words, that there must be a dialectical process. In other words: 3- He always has a thesis, which, following a process socially dynamic: 4 Will, it is assumed, always rise to an antithesis, in turn: 5- Will result, it is assumed, in a synthesis, i.e.: 6- A new thesis, up to the final course of history, that would be, for Marx, the so-called "perfect society". _ "This is a utopia?" Know how many, however, that, for Marx, there is a path, while target, to follow, but also that, this way, unlike who espouse the idealistic, it is only the floor. That is, in the words of Marx: "To be able to transform (the companies and/or our social condition) must also be capable of transformer if ...” Here is the real meaning of this book: "Can anyone can become without access to clarification, without the awareness critical and/or without being able to learn to think, in addition to only (by means of institutions called educational learn) thoughts, in the form of canned knowledge that (as I once wrote in Nietzsche) settled our thoughts? We hope that this book, as well as the dozens of works of the author may, in some way, contribute to the formation of a generation more happy, human, fraternal, respectful of their differences, aware and intellectually emancipated.