Heraclitus

For Heraclitus (centuries VI and V C), Greek philosopher, nothing is immovable, invariant, that is, nothing he remains what he is; in contrast, everything is changedded, everything is in movement, everything flows, everything is to devir. The engine of this transformation is the contradiction that is contained in all the things. This wants to say that in the interior of each thing it has opposing forces in fight between itself and that they make with that it leaves of being what is and if becomes another thing. In the time of Scrates and Plato, the word ' ' dialtica' ' it assigned a certain way to argue or to dialogue that it had for objective to explicitar the contradictions gifts in the reasoning of the interlocutors, in order to surpass the divergences of the particular opinions and to reach the true knowledge. This direction is next to the etimolgico, therefore dialectic comes of the Greek term dialektk, that it means ' ' the art to argue and to use arguments lgicos' ' (Houaiss dictionary). Throughout the history of the philosophy, many philosophers had made use of the dialectic concept, attributing it diverse connotations, but always emphasizing the aspect of the contradiction.

This, therefore, constitutes a basic element in the perspective dialectic. But who, in fact, systemize the dialectic as method of interpretation of the reality was an idealistic German philosopher of centuries XVIII and XIX Hegel call. It conceives the dialectic as a process that results of the contradictions gifts in the thought. Marx absorbs the dialtico nucleus of the hegeliano thought, but it confers a materialistic character. For it, the reality, the world, the society also is permeados by contradictions, but these do not derive from the thought, and yes in the way as the men produce its material existence and of the type of social relations that establish between itself in this productive process. Thus, for Marx and Engels, it is not the thought that, organizing itself of contradictory form (thesis, antithesis and synthesis), produces the reality material, but yes the reality that, for force of contradictions in it gifts (as the fight of classrooms, for example) generate the different forms of thought.

Jean Paul Sartre

It emphasizes subjects as the individual, choices and the nonsense of the life human being when contemplating a rational understanding of the universe (Blackburn, 1997; Cabral, 2006). The first philosopher who if really affirmed as existencialista, that assumed this denomination, was Jean Paul Sartre (Borheim, 2005; Cabral, 2006), but, for some researchers, existencialistas characteristics can be perceived in the writings of diverse authors, amongst them: Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Marcel, Jaspers, Unamuno, Abbagnano, Chestov, Camus among others (Borheim, 2005; Vicente, 1885, v.05). How much to the existencialistas workmanships, generally romances, these, on the other hand, react against the point of view of that the Universe is a closed system, coherent and intelligible; however on the other hand, they see the uncertainty resultant of this paradigm as an affliction reason. It was in this context that Jean-Paul Sartre pointed out in its writings the importance of the freedom human being and, in consequence, its freedom moral. Still for Sartre, the existencialismo is the only doctrine that leaves a possibility of choice to the man (Sartre, 1987). When defending this affirmation, the existencialistas mention the fact to it of that, to its to see, during the existence, each one constructs its proper essence (Cabral, 2006).

In accordance with the writings of Sartre (1987), ‘ ‘ The man nothing more is of what what it makes of itself mesmo’ ‘. In this way, Blackburn (1997) and Cabral (2006) corroborate when affirming that the workmanships of Sartre have matrix of exploration of tension choices and can sociopoliticamente be considered with the period where they had been written. The existencialismo concentrates its studies in the man concrete, limited for the time, searching a direction it its life.

Commodity Exchange

In this theory the main criterion for the equilibrium of the market and the equivalent exchange (the price objective, the objective value of exchanging quantities of goods) is subjective satisfaction with the relative exchange of the bulk of its participants. That is a recognition of the bulk of the participants sharing the fact that these prices and profits are the result of equivalent exchange. Many researchers are trying to construct a theory of commodity, based on a completely objective parameters of the equivalence of exchanging goods. Moreover, not even trying this equivalence is represented as an objective basis subjective satisfaction with the exchange of its members, as if the goods exchanged between themselves, without the subjects of exchange. In fact, even if the goods and would have an objective equivalence, then it should have been reflected in the minds of the participants sharing, creating in him the subjective satisfaction of the exchange, without which there is no exchange process. Extremely simplified producer has the lone entrepreneur who has no compensation fund work, no profit, there's only revenues and costs of production and sale of goods. The value of remaining net cost of revenue, according to the theory, is the producer price of labor. That amount, thus determined by the price of labor across a succession of producers of goods, makes the price of production and sale of the commodity. Objective price of a commodity, or an equivalent exchange market is formed by perfect competition subjective understanding of participants in the exchange of equal value of exchanging goods.