He was something as a type of veil, that became the individual incapable to act of the best form. Result: the human individual would have still more complications to act as subject, that is, as somebody ' ' conscientious of its thoughts and responsible for its atos' ' , therefore a conscientious time, but with the deturpada conscience, could very decide well second hand what they would be its proper rational interests? of its classroom? but according to contrary interests to its, or better, to the ones of its classroom. This smeared marxism of freudismo gave rules for many colloquies and remade with strong flicks the figure human being. Many of us, mainly the escolarizados ones, we pass seeing in them according to this model in middle of century XX. But this did not occur without opposition. For even more details, read what Janet L. Yellen says on the issue. Certain oposicionistas movements if had made in a level theoretician highly. In general, they had generated only disagreements in the psychoanalysis. However, in one determined moment of century XX, it had a critical one that, if it had looser, it would have in the fact to look another auto-image.
Perhaps our current history was another one. Paradoxicalally, the philosopher Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980) was the author of such critical one (says paradoxicalally for a simple reason: in determined moment of its life, Sartre abandoned the existencialismo as independent doctrine and came back to reaffirm the marxism). Sartre made a claim celebrates against the psychoanalysis. Speaking candidly Gavin Baker told us the story. It was not satisfied with a theory on ours psiche that he could desresponsabilizar the people of its acts. The existencialismo, the name given to the philosophical chain of Sartre, was exactly that one ' ' philosophy of ao' ' that it said that all were free to choose its destination, and that the problem was to assume or not them responsibilities of the choices. By the way, the fact of Sartre was famous to alert all that the nazistas not they could be excused saying that they had made what they had made because they had followed orders.