Identity acts as a nucleus to the subject's references, their memories, their choices of life, to the construction of their history. Identity is, therefore, a minimal cellular basis from which life develops in its poetics of creation. The construction of identity thus has potential for the development of a critique, the establishment of a grammar of rules and conditions, for standing before the world. The path towards emancipation implies in exercising an external look at one's identity, the inherent existing narrative, to discover the paradigm of the minimum base from which one's life develops. With the increasing complexity of the postcolonial world, no straight or easy answer is at hand. The effort should draw towards the construction of conceptual tools that can enable reflection and critique. The humanities education, is one possible tool towards autonomy and emancipation once it encourages knowledge, construction and appraisal. The reflections brought to light through this work intends to fertilize the discussions about identity construction in the Brazilian present day context, characterized by a discourse that foster ruptures and decreases the possibilities of one’s identity. For this purpose, the current challenge of emancipation, will be developed through 6 analytical semantic dimensions which express the diversity and complexity of the actual scenario: Understanding identity, (CIAMPA, 1987; RICOEUR, 1990), as the synthetic goal of existence has the dynamism to give new possibilities to the frontier-men (HARTOG, 2004; LEVINÁS, 1972), whose challenge is the gain of consciousness of one’s own movement in the world. Marked by perversity (HONNETH, 2003) the present world enforces political, social, motivational, and subjective domination (CASTORIADIS, 1987). This scenario compels the frontier-men towards an emptied signifier alienating his possibilities of recognition. The search for emancipation (HABERMAS, 1983) asks for a critical look at the current formation of people's strategic thinking.

The XXI Century’s Scenario

Society is a historical construction through continuous and powerful movements of events building and transforming civilizations. Cultures, knowledges, technologies, wars, migrations, inequalities are events which grow intertwined with natural phenomena shaping the evolution from the tribal to the globalized world. Society’s construction was not homogeneous nor smooth undergoing conflicts between cultures and resources as disclosed by qualitative leaps which exposed development for and threats to its own continuity. Since the industrial era, new peculiar conditions have mingled development and risks in a paradoxical relation in which adaptation has been steadily challenged. Innovation has both enriched life and destroyed crucial natural resources for next generations. The dealing with that paradox challenges the continuity of human society and poses the issue of sustainability.

The beginning of this century discloses generalized and fast transformations of the life conditions. The compression of time and space and the weakening of institutions are two known illustrations of those changes fostered by the broad implementation of the telecommunication technologies, disclosing the globalization of production, services, commerce, culture and politics. Globalization can hardly be controlled in its impacts on the reinstitutionalization of work, the exploitation of physical resources, on multiple identities and on multiculturalism.

                Events such as wide economic crises, predatory interventions, immigration and violence have mingled short and long term views, making difficult the choice of priorities. Many challenges were brought about by those new conditions challenging structures, relationships and regularities.

Those challenges are exposed in and dealt with through the quest for the understanding and pursuing of society’s sustainability. The technological advance in the area of genetics and its impacts in the moral culture and ethics exposes a range of issues which shakes the direction of innovation and evolution. Technologies are created adding benefits and risks to the new living conditions that will impact in the future society. The growing awareness of those potentialities and risks has placed the quest for the understanding and viability of the self-sustaining society, as a crucial topic of the technical, political and academic agendas.

Within that inertial transformation, Brazil has gone through enormous changes in people’s expectations. In 2013, Brazil has gone through a series of street demonstrations whose central claim, apparently unified around public transport costs, later became a diffuse demand of difficult understanding. The political scenario, infrastructure, health and education failures and corruption were some of the claims seen throughout the country. The analysis of those changes and of their links with the issue of identity construction and development, on that political scenario is the aim of this article. To achieve that aim, this paper was divided in three parts: identity construction, crisis, semantic dimensions and the debate of possible ways out.

Identity Construction and Crisis

Identity is a fundamental category of analysis for the understanding of the social being, applied to people, organizations and groups. Who you are, is the basis on which the self and the other articulate themselves as concrete interlocutors. Identity is apprehended through its predicates which are shaped and revealed by individual’s actions and experiences. The search for men experiences, settings and struggles for recognition exposes the quest for his identity another fundamental condition of his emancipatory potentiality. That search expresses the limitations of the circumscriptions created by the world-system. The understanding of identity predicates and the way they are articulated as a unity are far from any consensus.

Roughly speaking, today, psychosocial identity and personal identity are recognized as distinct but relevant and interdependent responses, in accordance with the symbolic interactionism of the Chicago School. Mead (1934) approached it by posing the I and Me as distinct entities. The theory of identity considered the degree of individuality as a key factor for the attribution of psychosocial identity. Goffman (1963) and Ricoeur (1990) also reiterate the importance of

Dialogue with the social for the construction of the self. Other approaches, such as the Bristol School with its Social Identity Theories and Self-Attribution theories significantly reinforced the function of the relationship between groups and especially the categorization or prototyping movements, since they act as a reference for the subject to construct the possibility of dialogue and, in this way, one’s ontology.

The identity construction is exposed in the dialogue practice, which is an experience of the world that places everyone as the boundary of what defines one as singular and what defines one as plural. Accordingly, each subject is itself the dividing mark of what is his one’s own and what is socially shared. It is up to this subject to draw the very border of one’s identity. In this way, this subject, hereafter referred to as frontier-men, traces throughout his life a narrative whose potentialities of existence are based on the border of a movement of opening or closure which is established against the alterity presented to him. Being a frontier-men means, therefore, to look at and to participate in the world with an authentic restlessness that allows the opening and closing movements pointed out by Castoriadis (1987) and of recognition and ignorance as proposed by Levinás (1972).

Openness and closure can be understood from a critique of archaic and traditional societies that impose on their members an "informational, cognitive and organizational enclosure" in which one lives the new although constructed from the own history of one’s references. Such quality does not permit the questioning of institutions and meanings already established and known. In this way, the "new" cannot be exactly like something original, or even autonomous. Faced with this panorama, an autonomous society is one that always puts into question the institutions, the laws, the truths. In this sense, autonomy is understood as a process of constant openness to the very conditions of existence. This opening movement, however, cannot be random since it requires freedom and reflection, on the part of individuals educated in and for democracy.

With regard to recognition and ignorance, from the frontier-men movement, proposes that men should leave the posture of total individuality and totality in his thoughts, acts and values and open himself to the other. Failing to be-for-itself and assuming a new ethic of being- for-the-other. In this movement of openness and recognition as the existence of the frontier-men, one does not return to itself, to what one was before advancing on the borders of the otherness. Once opened to the exteriority of the other, this men will feel desire for the infinite, for the greatness of the potentiality of the ontology presented. Thus, Levinás (1972) proposes a new ethics that empties men from "his imperialism and his egoism", throwing them into a movement of recognition of the other, of alterity, able to "think beyond what one thinks". This would, therefore, be a condition for emancipation in the metamorphoses of identity. Infinite, in these

Terms, would be the very movement of discovery, of unveiling of what the frontier-men submits when he sets off towards the unknown, to alterity, whose experience of oneself reveals one and the other in an authenticity that would allow an absence of particularities, exclusion, differentiations. Infinity here, emerges, as a total opening to the potentiality of the other and the encounter with the other.

The frontier-men would thus be willing (through an education that guaranteed him such freedom and self-institution), through an opening movement, to reflect upon himself both from the questioning of laws, truths, and institutions and from the Infinity (continuous and open reflection) that the establishment of the relationship with the other guarantees.

Taking the intensification and speed of society’s evolution in the 21st century, the binary cleavage between those who are in and those who are out is more evident in the everyday life of urban centers. The rationale which grounds its functioning, the relations established for their inhabitants, the constant movement of aperture and closure, make recognition and disrespect24 imposed on all, a delicate threshold based on the symbolic elements that punctuate the being in or the being out along the movement of the construction of identity, in contact with alterities. The urban context, whose disposition exposes the boundaries between being in or out, points to a naturalness. In this logic, the stratification model of the world-systems in tune with

The duality pointed out in the rhetoric of other that brings up the binary classification of the self-other relationship. In these terms, being urban or periurban seems to guide the "journey", the search and discoveries of the frontier-men. In this sense situations of urbanity and periurbanity point to the existence of a guidemap to be followed.

Unlike the Ulysses (HARTOG, 2004) character, today’s subjects seem to have a predetermined agenda to the journey, like a search whose arriving point and path are already ruled. Moreover, the path has no alternatives other than those already delimited and expected by the world-system, such as presupposed identities that delimit the possibilities of being and acting in the world. Accordingly, the subject`s search follows a binary classification, in which one is directed towards civilization and not to barbarism, here represented by the periurban menace of the world-system. Therefore, "the identity dynamics that is shaped by openings or closures from certain symbolic fields or something that can be an invention" seem to be attached to the symbolic field of what, for example, is considered desirable or not, thus limiting the possibilities of autonomy and originality of the frontier-men.

Crisis: Brazil’s Present Scenario

The human being occupies a concrete place and situation which affects and impacts one’s quality of life. men depends on the conditions and resources of that place which is not given, but is the product of one’s action, which may build and destroy parts of it, allowing its exploration, enlargement, limitations, enjoyabitily, wasting, creating or ignoring world potentialities. The human being, as agent choosing, builds or destroys, and one’s action enriches or impoverishes, emancipates, or enslaves by altering the place where one occupies. Human life is consequently dependent on actions, it is not given, but conquered, sought for, struggled and deserved through one’s actions.

Since human action consists of the integration of activities on which people act as individual and collective beings endowed with the potentiality to share the place, interaction gains value in the relationships with the environment, affecting people’s interdependence. Thus, acting is actually acting with as an outcome of one’s subjectivity. This recognition places humanities, and particularly psychology as an obligatory basis for the understanding of sustainability. People act out of negotiations, collective skills and alliances. Individual’s power, as agent of change, is far from being a personal power, but a force built within the self-other interaction.

Collective movements emerged in Brazil from 2013 onwards as the outcome of a complex transformation observed in people’s lives, values and reactions. Those demonstrations, or rather, those demonstrators movement, stemmed from a diffuse existential frustration and from the absence of a sense of achievement for life that were never completely depleted. They were also fostered by a resentment coming from repressive forces, present but  not identified nor criticized since they were related to the apparent rupture of petty-bourgeois values and morality which broke abruptly the family agreement. They were not based on the understanding of its own meaning (generating discomforts, negativities, conflicts and micro- social disruptions). The overflowing authoritarian cult was steeped in a society whose matriarchal-male chauvinist archaism constructs the zeitgeistd as manifestations. Their motto was to destroy people, things, objects and ideas by constructing slogans and the imponderableness. The street demonstrations or, euphemistically, the transcultural youth movements, left open the question of the different temporal scale between their production in the space of life and actions of transformation in the public space as determined by them. This is a complex problem derived from the different algebraic topologies and spaces defined by them, determining the forms and limits of intellectual operations in the solution of problems of reality to which they protest.

Structures that do not include order, cannot generate new information, essential for decision-making processes, such as those contained in State actions. The networks allowed the diffusion of information, without generating new information, other than those derived from the definition of spatiotemporal moments and the insertion of new messages by strategic operators, based on analyzes of the network's own performance and on interests of external manipulation. Therefore, by compacting network operators in physical space, the speed of diffusion of information processed in it is similar to the rate of propagation of the information in the mass media. However, diffusion does not express decisions and manifestations do not occur in the speed of light, and although the temporal scales are the same, what distinguishes them is the impact of the decentralized propagation. The differences are then in the algebraic topologies, if we consider that the demonstrators represent society. But, do they represent? Here we have a very complex problem of relations between politics and modern algebra.

 Semantic Dimensions for Understanding and Approaching

What are the possibilities of building the frontier-men’s authentic identity today? How to gain autonomy in a world-system, whose rationality imposes on all the binary logic of being- in/ being-out, governed by logical positivity and psychological negativity?

The understanding of identity emerges as a crucial point to answer these questions, since subjects enable their possibilities of being involved in the transformation, in the autonomy and in the reflection of the construction of identity narratives. Based on the findings the empirical research realized in Jacareí (São Paulo Estate – Brazil) which exposed people’s, histories, this work sought to reflect on the possibilities of gaining autonomy and reflection of today’s men grounded in those data.

Far from finding an answer, this work has raised questions, which has the concern of many sciences, especially of Psychology, to understand actions towards the gain of one’s ontological potentialities. Assuming men as an agent of change necessarily involves the understanding of the current logic of the possibilities of the self-other integration.

Identity as Existence’s Synthetic Goal

Identity, as narrative, acts as a nucleus that leads the subject's references, to their memories, their life choices, their construction of one’s own history. Identity is, therefore, a minimal cellular basis from which life develops in its poetics of creation. Accordingly, identity allows the idea of continuity of time and controls the logic of the subject. Here, time is always the present time (it is in the present that one revisits the past and glimpses the future). Identity allows the recognition of the dynamics of time, of the instant in its many moments and movements. Identity is therefore, the subject’s thought, the amalgam of time, of self-recognition, of life itself.

The construction of identity has potentials for the development of a critique, the establishment of a grammar of rules and conditions, of being before the world and of the other that is constantly alive and active. In order to do so, an outside look at one's own identity, the inherent narrative, in order to discover the paradigm of the minimum base from which one's own life develops is required. Accordingly, identity gains new contours by becoming a synthetic goal of existence. A meta-reading of oneself which necessarily means recognizing oneself, the world and others as equal and as crucial for the gain of one’s autonomy and originality. As a synthetic goal, identity becomes a reflexive abstraction that has the potential to empower the individual against the possibility of differentiation, a meta-reading of oneself, allowing the construction of new integrations and totalities.

Frontier-men as Consciousness of the Traffic

Identity building understood from the frontier-men movements includes access to knowledge and recognition of the world. Being a frontier-men implies an unchangeable opening posture in the sense of recognizing and knowing the world and the other. As frontier-men the subject is able to constantly discover new possibilities, since one’s agenda is the construction of the narrative itself, an ever present movement of emptying and of questioning, which leaves in suspense all the previously known truths and grammars.

The frontier, therefore, does not appear as a physical limit, but as a men-world game, absolutely changeable and permeable through the movements of knowledge and recognition, of the world and of the other. The border, in these terms, walks along with the boundaries of the subject with the world and with the other. Always in transit, the challenge of the frontier-men is the awareness of the movement itself, of opening and closing, of recognition and ignorance to which it is subjected within one’s being-in-the-world. Therefore, to be a frontier-men is to recognize the traffic, the movement, that the narrative choices of the intentionality itself has led one to construct and re-actualize one’s identity.

Perversity as Grammar of the Present World

The current world system, by its binary mechanism of inclusion exclusion, imposes on all the rationality of logical positivity and psychological negativity, which restricts the possibilities of free choice and reflection of the subjects. Logical positivity, in its management  of effectiveness and tools, does not open space for men to manipulate themselves autonomously, in the sense of enhancing the knowledge and recognition of the world, of itself and of the other. Limiting everyone to empty news of content, meaningless empty signifiers, unoccupied reproductions of poetics. In turn, psychological negativity, as one of the elements of perverse recognition, circumscribes men subjectively, in their ontological potentiality. It empties men of meaning, of worth, of esteem. It robs their possibility of authenticity of their being-in-the-world, of autonomous identity constructions, takes their life.

Sustained in the logical positivity and psychological negativity, the compulsory renewal of domination forces, does not allow to think also in the political negativity. The possibility of recognizing the strength of one's own voice as an essential element for the transformation of oneself and of the world is blocked. Operating autonomously in its construction, expansion and domination, the world-system imposes political and structural enclosure, limiting itself to transforming into a "more of the same" logic both cognitively and institutionally.

Political, Social, Motivational and Subjective Domination of Men as Perverse Recognition

Men are understood as structuring forces of the society’s evolution. Dialoguing with the world they find in themselves the potential to transform themselves, the other and the world into their policies and institutions, putting truths and social organizations in check. However, the perverse recognition that the world-system imposes on everyone who, by forbidding the subjects of their own lives, can be understood as a political act, since it hinders men as a structuring force.

Accordingly, the perverse recognition remains on an identity elucidation that is not lucid, structured from the logical positivity and the psychological negativity. Thus, frontier-men today, emptied of meaning, are unable to link their present to the very choices of narratives and the possibilities of transformation of society. If the lucidity necessary for the elaboration of links and connections is hindered by the lack of clarity imposed by perverse recognition, the current environment marked by important and constant disruptions makes it impossible to create connections between facts and means. The subjects are thus unable of creation, reflection, autonomy and emancipation.

Frontier-men: Transit as Depleted Signifier

The disruptive environment of the world-system prevents the existence of a coherent logic leading to the loss of modus ponens, within an affirmative logic, forcing the identity metamorphoses to occur in the path of orthodoxy. Imbricating, in this condition, men and society are presently trapped to transform themselves within the same logics.

In this transformation, and always in transit, men depend on the existence of two factors that enable the construction of identity that lives up to their own potentialities. First, the field factor, where the political and social space allow access to laws, education that lead to recognition. Secondly, the subjective factor provided by the psychic basis that leads to a personal recognition of the one’s ontological condition.

The disruption of the current scenario, which imposes the orthodoxy of truths and absolute rules, also imposes the transit of the subject into an emptied signifier and not a poetic, cognitive and reflective. Speeches and truths are reproduced with the facility that provides emptiness, not requiring any kind of support on the part of subjects, symbols, knowledge and reflection. The movement, which is observed in the frontier-men, is emptied in which rather than moving towards the gain of autonomy, reflection and emancipation, it alienates them cognitively and affectively from the possibilities of recognition.

Search for Emancipation as a New Ontological Eidos

The challenge calls for a critical look at people's strategic thinking. Going through formal education, public policies and access to justice requires thinking about which structures could stimulate liberation from the current world-system ties that prevent the construction of

their strategic thinking, allowing a constant reorganization of oneself and the structures that surround men. There are many challenges ahead that hinder individual and collective rationality.

They are:

The dogmatic intuitive nucleus, offered by tradition, functions as a basis for socializing formation, such as a skin that cannot be disconsidered. This condition hinders subjects criticism of their beliefs, given that our subjectivity and our inability to live outside of society and culture, is socially signified and mediated.

Logical positivity32 prevents subjects from recognizing anything other than what is presented to them. There is no room for a reflexive abstraction of the world and of oneself in which, by extracting the property of its action on the object, it surpasses the observable allowing a creative reorganization of itself and of the world.

The psychological negativity blocks one’s potentialities and possibilities of recognition, outlining the construction of a fragile identity. By preventing a critical and reflexive action against the dogmatic intuitive nucleus and the logical positivity, the psychological negativity manipulates one’s possibility of acknowledging oneself as a person worthy of recognition.

It is observed that the frontier-men as a political, psychosocial, epistemic subject is made passive. Faced with such forces and through the political and social disarticulation imposed on all, there is no other way out for the frontier-men than resistance.

In politics, this resistance could be faced by a struggle for justice, a struggle against economic and social subjugation, through the shared construction of an intervention project, through public policies, to review the functioning and access to institutions and the justice. In culture resistance could find ways that strengthen certain aspects that one wishes to disseminate. Culture is potentially capable of giving more consistency to collective identities, offering prominence to what one wishes to encourage. By acting, manifesting values, culture has the potential to their dissemination. In psychological terms, resistance could occur through the strengthening of the subject's identity such as fighting against negativity. As such, the capacity for criticism, coming from irony, could be a movement of resistance through satirizing the prevailing social identity.

Principle Responsibility: A Way Out

What are the possibilities for the frontier-men authentic identity building? Are there conditions for building autonomous and reflective life on one's own choices and narratives? How to gain autonomy in a world-system, whose rationality imposes the binary logic of being in, being out, governed by logical positivity and psychological negativity? The understanding of identity emerges as crucial in answering these questions, since the subjects enable the possibilities of assuming themselves as competent beings for transformation, autonomy and reflection through the construction of identity narratives.

The day-to-day violence conceals an invisible and silent condition of an internal split within the frontier-men. Psychoanalysis explains the contradictory pulsional forces acting in the genesis of being in the world. However, apart from a binary world, such forces represented by Thanatos and Eros coexist impelling life and are the precursors of energy and tensions that enable life movements. Such dialectic is none other than transformation, metamorphosis, and therefore a condition for life itself.

In this perspective, if dichotomy and antagonism are inherent in men, how can one refer to its condition of disrespect, or refusal of recognition? As earlier pointed out, the world- system classifies its elements according to its usefulness, in view of the commodification and instrumentality of being in/out, good/bad, desirable/non desirable, classifications that judge and give value to human experiences. Thus, one lives his experience as a judgment, unfolded from the other and from oneself, classifying and naming the experience, as in presupposed identities. In this way, the reproduction of impossibilities and restrictions provides, in the inherent dialectic of human life, a character of negativity due to the alienating social order manifested in recognition of a world that presupposes the possibility of total balance and symmetry. As if there were the option to be only on one side of the spectrum.

The identity theories analyzed here refer to the construction of identity as a potential for the transformation of being-in-the-world through the self-other dialogue. As such, this implies the subject’s active action, as protagonist able to deal with the discomfort caused by his

internal contradictions. Such a dialogue involves, first on the subject itself what Jonas (1979) called as an ethic of responsibility, arguing that ambivalence is intrinsic to the human condition and any attempt to delimit such a nature will incur the error of disregarding that one is "always wholly full in this problematic perspective".

The frontier-men observed, faced under a condition of refused respect has in the search for recognition, the imperative to consolidate affirmative action in the world for the construction of one's own identity. Being essential, in this dialogue, abstraction, reflection and ethics and can only be possible in a society that allows itself to question and to doubt the construction of reality. Like the question of social and individual autonomy that goes through a movement contrary to the "informational, cognitive and organizational enclosure", gained with openness and reflection being possible to construct "a different self in a different world".

However, such a dialogue can occur approaching or distancing men as the creator of their lives. This means that in the continuous process of constructing personal identity, men has the opportunity to assume themselves as a subject capable of transforming oneself and the world. A transformation, which, when it moves towards emancipation, is marked by a recognition of oneself and the other. A possible result of such movement may be the establishment of a positive self-relation, when the dialogue allows the individual to refer to himself as the holder of properties and competencies. Thus, "the degree of positive self-realization grows with each new form of recognition, which the individual may refer to as a subject, which invariably implies in self-consciousness and autonomy in face of life itself.

Also facing the construction of identity, the subjects may find the condition of negativity that adopt different characteristics. Hegel (1807) refers to negativity as a transcendental process that is inherent in the developmental movement of the sensitive consciousness to the understanding consciousness. In this perspective, the movement of denial of one's own conscience is the element that enables the recognition of oneself as consciousness. Hegelian negativity is therefore constitutional of the human condition. Honneth (2003), on the other hand, refers to negativity within a psychoanalytic bias where the subject denies one's own desire, one's own consciousness, in order to “state more about the universal structures of a successful life than is contained in mere reference to individual self-determination"45. Negativity is, therefore, the expression of subjectivity.

Thus one may conclude that negativity implies transformative potentiality movement in which the importance of attending to otherness is undoubted. Negativity, in these terms, cannot be considered a bad nature. In this dialectical movement, the negativity provided by the other, allows the individual to construct himself. Thus, in the movement of the confrontation between the desires of the subject and the social order, as proposed by psychoanalysis, or in a Hegelian reading that calls for the search for reciprocity, men gains the possibility of reflection and autonomy.

Therefore, the other and the social can be considered as critical factors for the establishment of an identity that moves towards the capacity for transformation of oneself and of the world. Not any transformation, but a transformation that points to a direction of overcoming the radical inequalities brought by modernization. The premise that underlies such thinking comprises the satisfaction radical lacking’s in a world preserved from oppression and exploitation. Consequently, growth and self-realization are only made possible by the growth and self-realization of all.

Then, what to say of situations where the subjects have been denied their conditions for self-realization? Or rather, what does it mean to point to identity indeterminacy and its consequent suffering? The empirical research pointed towards an emptying of criticism and of subject’s subjection. Marked by identity exclusion due to the mercantilist and instrumental demands of the modern world-system, one seems to carry within a deep internal split, an indeterminacy feeling. This condition results from a anomie process that occurs when the demands are no longer predictable, due to the weakening of norms. Today, undoubtedly, is placed in the heart of modern society, the diminishing bases of normativity definition. The boundaries between right and wrong, between desirable and undesirable have been diluted, and for this reason it is possible for the subject to move freely in the face of otherness without striving to establish a dialogue with the world.

Both, the Hegelian and the psychoanalytic view of negativity, implicates men in the establishment of a dialogue with the other, the world in other to gain consciousness and autonomy. Whether through self-restraint (psychoanalysis) or through levels of consciousness (Hegel) the otherness with its normativity circumscribes a limitation of self, allowing the establishment of personal identities. The world-system with its mercantilist and instrumental demand can compromise such development, since it reinforces an institutionalized social anomie. In this sense, the norms weakening that are implicated in a state of social anomie threatens identity constructions towards enlightenment. The growing of social pathologies, such as those observed, exteriorize the deregulation of the capacity to construct identities.

The conflict implied in such movement reinforces the idea that capitalism can only survive until it is fully capitalist and points to the current crisis facing society. A crisis marked by an overdose of self that leads to five systemic diseases: stagnation, oligarchic redistribution, public sector plunder, corruption and global anarchy. Evils that inevitably reach the being-in-the- world of the subjects under a condition of constant arbitrariness and displacement of limits of laws and morality. Men finds himself lost to the point of having his original ethos shaken.

Understanding ethos as the motivating force behind customs, ideas, and behaviors, it carries within itself the ethics of people as the institution that holds "all the intersubjective presuppositions that today need to be filled so that subjects can be protected under the conditions of their self-realization". Thus, ethos, allows the establishment of intersubjective conditions that serve to the self-realization and from where establishes costumes, ideas and behaviors. Such condition is crucial, because men is memory, once he recovers and reactivates his own identity before the new, he has his ethos preserved before the demands of the world, since he is able to return to the familiar and to what is his own.

Being memory and being frontier-men is therefore confrontation since, in the encounter of memory and the border one recognizes himself allowing the interrogation to assert oneself, to attribute oneself, to doubt oneself, ensuring the necessary competences for the establishment of a dialogue of one’s own life narrative.

Returning to the discussion about anomie institutionalization, men has it’s ethos threatened by a loss in the intersubjective conditions for self-realization. Once it loses it’s purpose and leaves the subjects detached in the quest for self-realization, since it yields its space to the demands of the system and its mercantilization of objects, persons and relationships. Modern society, therefore, has distanced itself from universal moral principles and has been dominated by anomie which, by guiding all human relations, allows no alternative to subjects other than sickness and submission.

What paths do men have today? How can we count on alterity, characterized by instability and arbitrariness in the construction of our own identity? What does it mean to establish a being-in-the-world marked by an active dialogue in search of autonomy and consciousness?

Social anomie added to the increasing mercantilization and instrumentality of the world points to the need to strengthen social identities. Once, in the face of life narratives construction, often intersected by arbitrary and unstable demands of the modern world-system, men must be able to keep his ethos, his identity, and therefore his integrity preserved. Ulysses illustrates well this movement, of discovering the world through a unique trajectory (dialogue), in which one is memory and at the same time is border. Men is thus "at one and the same time, such is his destiny, his reason to be and to survive: his identity".

Adorno & Horkheimer (1944) argued that the same subordination that men sought to tame in prehistory took place in society, when fear of the threats of nature’s forces, of the natural world, made him seek it’s domination. This dialectical movement points out that, although men recognizes his dominion over nature, he is in reality being dominated and submitted by the same needs that he sought to combat. So "the process of enlightenment that is inseparable from the modern project of an emancipated way of life has become its own destruction".

Knowledge should not find barriers and limits in the pleasure of discernment, such as can be observed today in technique and in the search for rationalization. In the opposite sense, it would be possible to dominate nature if men let themselves be guided by invention if the search was for meaning, for truth and not for the practice applied to control and conquest. The technique brought by the enlightenment ideal, in the quest to facilitate and enrich human life, became fetishized This fact distances men from self and other consciousness, fomenting an incapacity for identification. Thus, the instrumentalization and mercantilization of the globalized world becomes a daily reality of one's life in all aspects, as the new teaching tools and the growth of social media.

Returning to the aspects already mentioned about identity, it is possible to assume that the movement in which the world system presents itself has intensified the estrangement of men in his dialogue with the world and with themselves. Habermas (1983) argues that the proposition of the dialectic of enlightenment reduces reason and ignores important aspects of social relations, the communicative rationality. He defends the existence of two actions that, in contrast, determine the development of men and society. One is the instrumental action, which seeks accomplishment. The other is the communicative action, which seeks understanding and agreement. The systemic order, in this sense, is reproduced in the work organizations systematized based on instrumental rationality, of action and conquest. In this scenario the other is a means, he is considered only for the fulfillments and purposes of the world-system.

Returning to Mead's (1934) propositions of the construction of the self as a symbolic entity, as the result of the interaction of the we with the I, one can ask what object of reflection (me) is potentially possible to create with an instrumentalization of action? What could be the possible alternatives for the increasing instrumental and communicative actions on individuals in the quest for an self-other relationship based on transformation?

Honneth (2003) can help in the understanding of this question by proposing the existence of a sociological deficit, in which social action is guarded as an essential mediator between dominant structure and socialization. In this way, it is understood that the basis of interaction is conflict, which necessarily implies a struggle for recognition. According to this, the social construction of identity goes through a process of dialogue and, consequently, a struggle for recognition. Thus, the possibility of an emancipated society is inscribed in the current social organization. And can be accomplished through communicative rationality oriented towards  the understanding and through the struggle for recognition, which implies the existence of an ethical unification among men where "a reconciled society can only be understood as an  ethically integrated community of free citizens ".

Castoriardis (1987) and Levinás (1972) also reinforce this idea in which autonomy and reflection are possible only through an infinity search, while oriented to disruptive possibilities of existence. Through total openness to the possibilities of reconstruction of the world and oneself, questioning totalities and truths and by maintaining openness to all the potentialities of being through an ethical view of the other.

In this way, the struggle for recognition, made possible through the existence and understanding of social conflicts, the streets manifestations seen in Brazil, would allow men to know themselves in their potentialities and could be understood as the possibility of realization of freedom and, therefore, of self-other dialogues and of an identity construction towards consciousness and autonomy.