As if the pretense death provided us it release of this necessity almost logical to make a mistake for, at last, still only in assuming to them 4. Everything seems us duly clearly. of glow notable who is, we feel ourselves legitimated to the formularization of a notion of I that, for effect, is deplored. If we are not enough exactly for us, I interrogate to them: Of where the guilt? Nobody erra without reasons, I think 5. no error I think to be possible free of some (lowermost that it is) relation 6. Assevero to them: I believe that all error that if it judges possible is not more than the desperation of the morality human being agonizing for on the yearning of already more not having of if blaming. That the sin is a vacant delirium and alone of the mind. no possible universe will perceive in the manifestation of the spirit of the men the hypothetical and pretense moral value of its action.

This says respect only to the scope where the reason creates its laws and, maken a mistake using itself of the not atypical subterfuge already: the senile esquecimento with that if it tries one to justify itself, is felt legitimated to extend to the units others of your proper species that one already alluded eticidade delirium yours. Yesterday I committed an error 7 which never I will olvidarei. More still: The cruelty is amazing with that today I take the blame 8 for the materialization of improper 9; Desumana is still the now present anguish for the fact of still yesterday. Worse of everything? Exactly thinking the guilt to be a moral point of view 10 on the fact that (I believe) always it estimates, as any manifestation of our spirit, a relation and for this exactly also the double-citizen, still I think to be the culprit. I want this guilt as only mine 11. That the morality of the action is only one judgment. But what I am seno the will of this exactly stops beyond which, when self-sacrificing, already more I do not perceive the supposed presence of I in place some? In synthesis: We do not have 12 to always leave of the estimated one of that it has perfect coincidence between a deontological the filling of a suit 13 and the supposed nature of an action that if assumes. Not even to think that the action there is justified by the context, attributing to it thus the positive moral value with that if it intends to excuse itself.

Perhaps in fact never it had guilt; inasmuch as also it did not have there more than what a curious subject presumption of itself exactly. However, that act I will leave tacit the nature of this me was object; as any object, also nothing pronounces it me, opening me the opportune one of the interpretation. The guilt is effect of the judgment for manifest me to the pretense action where the anguish for the error almost becomes me evident me. is always better and in agreement the peace that if it claims to feel itself guilty of a hypothetical error, that proper the hypothetical one to the doubtless error that makes in them to feel us guilty.