The philosopher believed that he was not possible in the meeting with the other to know its subjectivity for this if to find canine tooth and hidden in its body. Of this form he understood that one to who observed started to have an in agreement significao its thought and the representation that made of its image. The human being it was represented perspective according to cartesian, as a machine, this because it would not have possibility to also explain what it had in its interior, not being possible the explanation of what it appears in the gestures expressed for the face. According to author, when our vision finds the other, nor always is the human being that we see … but object of science.
When the other looks at me … for science is: an eye is crystalline, with the crnea and the retina. (LUIJPEN, 1973 p.274) As a distance between I and the other exists, my thought from determined attitude congregates information representative regarding what I see, the other is a meeting of concepts carried through in my proper thought. For Discardings, everything what it is observed in my being also exists in the other person and, is leaving of what I judge to know on I myself, that I construct to the necessities and the reality of the other person. Thus ' ' … the other does not pass of that I myself I create … the other I am I myself. (GALLO, 2008 p.2) From this, Discarding it inaugurated a philosophy of the conscience, where the reality this in the interior, that is attributed by the deductive thought: to know the other having in focus my proper thought, not needing contact.
Cartesian thinking foca about an imprisoned man in its solitude, not having … solidarity with the men who outside exist of me …. (JACOBY, 2008 p.4) the philosopher still observes that the representative thought is present in all the human beings and, that we are capable of through our conscientious one constructing the reality of something.