Mães na Bíblia.

1.      Eva, a primeira mulher e mãe

"Eva, a primeira mulher, nos faz lembrar a razão de ser “mulher”

Deus criou o homem conforme a sua imagem e semelhança (Gn 1.27): em pureza, inocência, sabedoria, bondade, verdadeiramente semelhante ao seu Criador. Colocou-o num jardim, que Ele mesmo plantara o Éden (ou “paraíso”, “lugar de deleite”)."

2.       Joquebede – a mãe de Moisés. 

Joquebede, exemplo de mãe

“Então lhe disse a filha de Faraó: ‘Leva este menino e cria-mo; pagar-te-ei o teu salário’. A mulher tomou o menino e o criou.” (Ex 2:9.)

3.      A mãe de Sansão.  Chamada à consagração


“Porém sua mulher lhe disse: 'Se o Senhor nos quisera matar, não aceitaria de nossas mãos o holocausto e a oferta de manjares, nem nos teria mostrado tudo isto, nem nos teria revelado tais coisas'.” (Jz 13.23).

4.      Ana – a mãe do grande Samuel.  Depois de orar e se quebrantar na presença do Senhor, Ana recebeu como resposta o nascimento do primeiro filho e o dedicou ao Senhor, como é dito nos primeiros capítulos de 1º Samuel. 
 Ana, mulher que orou:
“Levantou-se Ana  Ela, com amargura de alma, orou ao Senhor, chorou muito.” (1Sm 1.9a-10.)

5.      Lóide – a mãe de Timóteo. 


Numa citação rápida de 2 Timóteo, o nome desta serva de Cristo é apresentado como alguém que soube muito bem educar seu filho nos caminhos e na palavra de Deus

6. Rispa, a mãe incansável


“Então Rispa, filha de Aiá, tomou um pano de saco, e o estendeu para si sobre uma penha, desde o princípio da ceifa, até que sobre eles caiu água do céu; e não deixou as aves do céu pousar sobre eles de dia, nem os animais do campo de noite.” (2Sm 21.10.)

  7.  Maria – a mãe de Jesus.  exemplo de obediência

“porque contemplou na humildade da sua serva. Pois desde agora todas as gerações me considerarão bem-aventurada...” ( Lc 1.48.)

“Alegra-te muito, favorecida! O Senhor é contigo!”

Saudou a jovenzinha o anjo Gabriel.

A mulher que recebeu a maior honra de todas as mulheres, Dar a luz ao salvador do mundo, Gloria a Deus!


Mãe e sofrer no paraíso. A todas as mães. As bravas, as dóceis, as nervosas e as calmas: Deus as abençoe! A minha mãe Iracilda também. Mãe e pai durante muito tempo.

Cultos

Orando e buscando a graça do Senhor.

Functional theory of legal complexity.

Theory of legal complexity

Author

Rogério Oliveira

**Translated by google translator

1

Presentation

2

Analysis of the two theories

3

The Legal System

4

Theory of functional legal complexity

5-

Conclusion

* I will bring here a theoretical view of the law, law and justice according to my theory of legal complexity.

I will limit myself to quotations to support my thinking for sheer lack of time to do so. I waited a long time to present my theory to the world and I intend to do it fast for not knowing the future, but making sure that God knows all things.

I will present a definition of the two theories of complexity. make my analysis and complete.

I hope the academic community take this view something that can boost it forward or at least bring them new considerations or even new doubts.

Writer:

Rogério Oliveira:

* Born in Ipatinga, Minas Gerais, Rogério Oliveira, Studied at Bethany Evangelical Seminary, Brazilian branch of Bethany Fellowship, Bloomington on the outskirts of Minneapolis, USA. It is majoring in law.

Keywords: law, live right, intuitive, intelligent, senses and speech.

1

Presentation:

First, we present the two theories, which are struggling in the current scientific arena: Complexity theory and the theory of irreducible complexity.

-The Complexity theory:

"It is an interdisciplinary view about the complex adaptive systems, the emergent behavior of many systems, network complexity, chaos theory, the behavior of distant systems from thermodynamic equilibrium and its self-organizing powers.

This scientific movement has had a number of consequences not only technological but also philosophical. The use of the term complexity is therefore still unstable and dissemination of literature often occur spurious uses, far from scientific context, particularly in the concept abstractions (crucial) for nonlinearity. "According to Wikipedia.

This theory seems complex as is his name, but looking closely at and away at the same time it is the theory, an attempt to make the relationship between the social sciences and other tangible and palpable. It is a significant advance at what was being treated and showed a new direction to follow.

-The Theory of irreducible complexity:

"Irreducible complexity is a concept used by proponents of intelligent design whereby certain biological systems have a complexity according to which it is highly unlikely to have arisen in an evolutionary way from simpler predecessors, or" less complete "through random mutations advantageous and natural selection occurred naturally, ie without the interference of intelligence, such as biological systems could only be functional if all the parts were present and assembled in the right order. "

2

Analysis of the two theories:

Well. The two theories are correct! Complexity theory're right to say that when we intervene in a system, this intervention will result in a new structure, be it social, political or even biological. Because, as shown in complexity theory, do not interfere with impunity in some system. Even if it is beneficial interference is the result of this interference is change.

But even in his hit, the overkill in your s consequences. The theory attributes to it, it has no powers. Such as the "butterfly effect". Plausible but very restricted in its arc of coverage.

The theory of irreducible complexity, is also correct in stating that a complex system just "may" OR MAY, where I would trade the word may by MUST be played if your all enter into the equation.

The system is so complex that take a thing of the place will make the whole system collapses or stops working. Correct! That's right. But the error of the theory is not recognize that even within this complexity, systems, although complex, and not accept the interference collapsed but continued to expand and to improve.

One is the view that everything can be touched at one point and from then on the system regulates itself. The other sees the system as they can only be moved as a whole and then sistemo function.

3

The Legal system:

"Legal or Legal system is the set of interdependent legal norms, assembled according to a unifying principle.

These rules use prescriptive language, whose purpose is to regulate the social.Assim coexistence, positive law is a prescriptive empirical system as objective stipulate the conduct of individuals. "

The laws regulating the system call. But what we see is the need of regulatory law be modified and sometimes suppressed because of its senility or because she was dead law.

But when I see legislators and judicadores trying to do it, I see the error they commit not for lack of ability, but perhaps clinging to a theory over another or not to act in a greater way and change more than shows on demand .

So that you understand. Using complexity theory, many will surgically acting on a certain point, even though the complexity of fact, enact laws on specific facts that would require greater action, an action as a whole. It's like editássemos a law that no one else would have hunger, but we did not say where would the food, who would pay for it and transport and especially those who produce at the right price or even free.

Or using a simpler figure, when the directions of the way he moved, making it the single or double hands and does not interfere with other adjacent tracks what you have is confusion and chaos. And chaos is not theoretical is real.

Using the irreducible theory, we would change everything, but not permitiríamos no interference in the engine. Believing that it is eternal and unchanging, which is nothing, only God.

To change a system should change it completely. An action from A to Z and preparing the system to accept complex actions located that change the system, improve the same, but that do not cause rejection in the body.

4

Functional theory of legal complexity:

The theory of functional complexity is the theory that to improve a system must achieve a total change: if the security system, he moved around, as the health system also, if the political system idem. And this change, let the system able to receive interventions within the same, but in their implementation, do not end up with the system that is trying to improve.

So if we want to improve the legal and political system of a nation, first we review fully, changing or confirming its mechanisms. At this time, by inserting it in the system itself, a mechanism that can change without the system to stop or will below.

It is as if we needed more power in an engine and when we exchange a piece received a bonus: fuel consumption increases, the premature wear of parts and other things the most.

On the contrary, changing the whole engine and then interfering in even with the right parts and due to it, we will have the same car, Justice, but with best-performs and will accept occasional interference without collapsing or disturbing the rest of it.

The two theories applied and amalgamated.

5-

Conclusion:

The defense of any theory must pass the scrutiny of the "I will wait to see if anyone thinks differently." It's like getting a new run, revolutionary but at the end of the year or out of line not be as revolutionary as well, or irremediable defects. What many do is acquire the second generation, why? Why it comes with solutions, successes and especially with answers that the first did not.

Change everything to change little.

Bibliography:

Teoria da complexidade jurídica funcional.

Teoria da complexidade jurídica

Autor 

Rogério Oliveira

1-

Apresentação

2-

Analise das duas teorias

3-

O sistema Jurídico

4-

Teoria da complexidade jurídica  funcional

5-

Conclusão

* Vou trazer aqui uma visão teórica sobre  a lei, o direito e a justiça de acordo com minha teoria da complexidade jurídica. 

Não vou me ater a citações para corroborar meu pensamento por pura falta de tempo para fazê-lo. Esperei muito tempo para apresentar minhas teoria ao mundo e pretendo fazê-lo rápido por não saber o futuro, mas tendo a certeza que Deus conhece todas as coisas.

Vou apresentar uma definição das duas teorias da complexidade. fazer minha analise e concluir. 

Espero que a comunidade acadêmica tire desta visão algo que possa impulsiona-la a frente ou pelo menos trazer-lhes novas considerações ou mesmo novas duvidas.

Writer:

Rogério Oliveira:

* Born in Ipatinga, Minas Gerais, Rogério Oliveira, studied at Bethany Evangelical Seminary, Brazilian branch of Bethany Fellowships, Blomington on the outskirts of Minneapolis, USA. It is majoring in law.

Keywords: law, live right, intuitive, intelligent, senses and speech.

1-

Apresentação:

Em primeiro lugar, apresentamos as duas teorias, que se digladiam na arena cientifica atual: A teoria da complexidade e a teoria da complexidade irredutível.

-A teoria da complexidade:

"Trata-se de uma visão interdisciplinar acerca dos sistemas complexos adaptativos, do comportamento emergente de muitos sistemas, da complexidade das redes, da teoria do caos, do comportamento dos sistemas distanciados do equilíbrio termodinâmico e das suas faculdades de auto-organização.

Esse movimento científico tem tido uma série de consequências não só tecnológicas mas também filosóficas. O uso do termo complexidade é portanto ainda instável e na literatura de divulgação frequentemente ocorrem usos espúrios, muito distantes do contexto científico, particularmente em abstrações ao conceito (crucial) de não-linearidade.", segundo a Wikipédia.

Esta teoria parece complexa como é seu nome , mas olhando de perto e de longe ao mesmo tempo é ela, a teoria, uma tentativa de tornar as relações entre as ciências sociais e outras, tangíveis e palpáveis. É um avanço significativo ante o que estava sendo tratado e mostrou um nova direção a seguir.

-A Teoria da complexidade irredutível:

"Complexidade irredutível é um conceito usado pelos proponentes do Design Inteligente segundo o qual certos sistemas biológicos possuem uma complexidade segundo a qual é altamente improvável que tenha surgido de forma evolutiva a partir de predecessores mais simples, ou "menos completos", através de mutações aleatórias vantajosas e seleção natural ocorridas naturalmente, i.e. sem a interferência de inteligência, pois tais sistemas biológicos só poderiam ser funcionais se todas as suas partes estivessem presentes e montadas na ordem certa."

2-

Analise das duas teorias:

Bem. As duas teorias estão corretas! A teoria da complexidade esta certa ao dizer que quando intervimos em um sistema, desta intervenção resultará numa nova estrutura, seja ela, social, politica ou mesmo biológica. Porque, como mostra a teoria da complexidade, não se interfere impunemente em sistema algum. Mesmo que está interferência seja benéfica, o resultado desta interferência é mudança.

Mas mesmo em seu acerto, a um exagero em sua s consequências. A teoria atribui a se mesma, poderes que ela não tem. Tais como o "efeito borboleta". Plausível, mas muito restrito em seu arco de abrangência.

A teoria da complexidade irredutível, também está correta em afirmar que um sistema complexo só "pode" OU PODERÁ, onde eu trocaria a palavra pode por DEVE, ser tocado se o seu todo entrar na equação.

O sistema é tão complexo que tirar uma coisa do lugar fará com que todo o sistema desabe ou pare de funcionar. Correto!  É isto mesmo. Mas o erro dá teoria está em não reconhecer que mesmo dentro desta complexidade, a sistemas que, apesar de complexos, aceitam a interferência e não desabaram, mas continuaram a se expandir e até a melhorar.

Uma tem a visão de que tudo pode ser tocado em um ponto e daí em diante o sistema se autorregula. A outra vê o sistema como só podendo ser tocado como um todo e então o sistemo funcionará.

3-

O sistema Jurídico:

“Sistema jurídico ou legal é o conjunto de normas jurídicas interdependentes, reunidas segundo um princípio unificador.

Essas regras utilizam uma linguagem prescritiva, cuja finalidade é disciplinar a convivência social.Assim, o direito positivo é um sistema empírico prescritivo, pois objetiva preceituar a conduta dos indivíduos."

As leis que nos regulam chamamos sistema. Mas o que vemos é a necessidade das lei reguladoras serem modificadas e outras vezes suprimidas devido a sua caduquice ou por ser ela lei morta. 

Mas quando vejo legisladores e judicadores tentando faze-lo, vejo o erro que cometem não por falta de capacidade, mas por talvez, apego a uma teoria em detrimento de outra ou por não poder agir de forma maior e mudar mais do que apresenta em demanda.

Para que você entenda. Usando a teoria da complexidade, muitos vão cirurgicamente atuando sobre um determinado ponto, mesmo sabendo da complexidade do fato, promulgam leis sobre fatos específicos que necessitariam de uma ação maior, uma ação num todo. É como se editássemos uma lei dizendo que ninguém mais teria fome, mas não disséssemos de onde viria o alimento, quem pagaria pelo mesmo e seu transporte e principalmente quem o produziria a preço justo ou mesmo gratuitamente.

Ou usando uma figura mais simples, quando muda-se as direções das vias, tornando-as mãos únicas ou duplas e não se interfere nas outras vias adjacentes o que se tem é confusão e caos. E o caos não é teórico é real.

Usando a teoria irredutível, Mudaríamos tudo, mas não permitiríamos mais nenhuma interferência no motor. Crendo que ele é eterno e imutável, o que nada é, só Deus.

Para se mudar um sistema deve muda-lo totalmente. Uma ação de A à Z e preparando o sistema para aceitar ações complexas localizadas que mudem o sistema, melhorem o mesmo, mas que não causem rejeição no organismo.

4-

Teoria da complexidade jurídica  funcional.

A teoria da complexidade funcional é a teoria segundo a qual para melhorarmos um sistema devemos realizar uma mudança total: se for o sistema de segurança, muda-se todo, se for o sistema de saúde também, se for o sistema politico idem. E nesta mudança, deixarmos o sistema apto a receber intervenções dentro do mesmo, mas que, na sua execução, não acabem com o sistema que se esta tentando melhorar.

Sendo assim, se queremos melhorar o sistema jurídico ou politico de uma nação, primeiro o revemos integralmente, mudando ou confirmando seus mecanismos. Neste momento, inserindo nele, no próprio sistema, mecanismo que se possa trocar, sem que o sistema pare ou venha a abaixo.

É como se necessitássemos de mais potencia em um motor e quando trocamos uma peça recebemos um bônus: o consumo de combustível aumenta, a um  desgaste prematuro de peças e outras coisas à mais.

Ao contrario, mudando todo o motor  e depois interferindo no mesmo  com as peças certas e devidas ao mesmo, teremos o mesmo carro, Justiça, mas com melhor performa-se e que aceitará a interferência pontual, sem desmoronar ou interferir no restante do mesmo.

As duas teorias aplicadas e amalgamadas.

5-

Conclusão:

A defesa de qualquer teoria deve passar pelo crivo do" vou aguardar para ver se alguém pensa diferente". É como adquirir um corro novo, revolucionário mas que no fim do ano ou sai de linha por não ser tão revolucionário assim, ou com defeitos insanáveis.  O que muitos fazem é adquiri a segunda geração, porque? Por que ela já vem com soluções, acertos e principalmente com respostas que a primeira não tinha.

Mudar tudo para mudar pouco.

Bibliografia:

http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexidade

http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexidade_irredut%C3%ADvel

- See more at: http://www.projuris.com.br/o-que-e-sistema-juridico-qual-sua-definicao/#sthash.NBXt8693.dpuf

Sonhar não paga imposto e é de graça.

      Joel

     2.28 E acontecerá, depois, que derramarei o meu Espírito sobre toda a carne; vossos filhos e vossas filhas profetizarão, vossos velhos sonharão, e vossos jovens terão visões;

Como já sou velho. Sonhar não paga imposto e só nos alegra.

O fim de um sonho pode ser o começo de outro.

Eu agradeço a Deus...

Eu agradeço a Deus por ter me usado para levar o evangelho aqueles que precisavam dele.
Eu agradeço a Deus por me ter feito.
Eu agradeço a Deus por ter me chamado, desde o ventre de minha mãe, como Profeta.
Eu agradeço a Deus por ter me usado no dom que tanto sonhei e pedi: Milagres e maravilhas.
Eu agradeço a Deus por ter visto o impossível acontecer, mesmo que só e diante dele.
Eu agradeço a Deus por me da a autoridade para abençoar.
Eu agradeço a Deus por ter me dado a capacidade de perdoar as maiores afrontas e traições.
Eu te agradeço, me Deus e meu Pai.
Eu te agradeço por  ter podido crer em suas promessas.
Obrigado pelo teu Santo Espírito em minha vida.

Felipe, O Evangelista. O primeiro Star trek?

E, quando saíram da água, o Espírito do Senhor arrebatou a Filipe, e não o viu mais o eunuco; e, jubiloso, continuou o seu caminho.
E Filipe se achou em Azoto e, indo passando, anunciava o evangelho em todas as cidades, até que chegou a Cesareia.
Atos 8:39,40


Rápido e rasteiro.  Felipe foi transportado do deserto para Azoto. Seria um teletransporte celestial? Um anjo tocou e ele apareceu em Azoto? O que vc acha?

Mundo louco....crazy world

Estão dividindo o mundo, não em questões politicas: Comunistas x capitalistas.  Ou questões econômicas: ricos x pobres. 

Estão dividindo o mundo em religiões.

Birmânia: Budistas x muçulmanos
Síria: Muçulmanos x cristãos
Iraque e Síria: Muçulmanos x Muçulmanos

Já avisei e falei, a próxima guerra será movida por causa da religião e seus atos.

Leia:
7 Porquanto se levantará nação contra nação, e reino contra reino, e haverá fomes, e pestes, e terremotos, em vários lugares.

Porque o filho despreza ao pai, a filha se levanta contra sua mãe, a nora contra sua sogra, os inimigos do homem são os da sua própria casa. Miquéias 7:6

100 Jesus não dá!

They are dividing the world, not on political issues: Communist x capitalists. Or economic issues: x rich poor.

They are dividing the world religions.

Burma: Buddhist x Muslim
Syria: Muslim x Christians
Iraq and Syria: Muslim x Muslim

I have warned and I said, the next war will be moved because of religion and his acts.

Read:
7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.


For the son dishonors the father, the daughter rises up against her mother, the daughter in law against her mother in law, a man's enemies are they of his own home. Micah 7: 6

Who is your God?

Who is your God?
Who is your God? Whom do you serve really? Whom you love and obey?
Many people have their god. Many love something or someone. Ma truth is that our God is one that is within our heart.

Who is your god?

Those who are Christians, as its name says, is God Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Born of the Virgin Mary, he grew up and died on a cross and rose again the third day.
Others are Muslims, because they believe in ALLAH and his Prophet Muhammad.
Others believe only in Jehovah, the Hebrews.
Other believe in Buddha, are Buddhists. This to name a few better known.
From all this it is you who must identify whom you serve and love.
I am not a Christian, since the term is not more those who believe in Jesus Christ, but represents the interests of religion, I am original believer, one who believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and with me all Christians, Catholics Protestants alike who accept Him as their one true God.

How do I know this?

Because he is my hope and my life. Through him I die, but do not kill. Through him I pray for those who persecute me, defame and slander. I for Him, as He, abençoeim, until even those who crucified me.

And you? What is thy God?

Money?
Power?
Pleasures of this life?

Quem é o teu Deus?

Quem é o teu Deus? A quem você serve de verdade? A quem você ama e obedece?

Muitas pessoas tem o seu deus. Muitos amam alguma coisa ou alguém. Ma a verdade é que o nosso Deus é aquele que está dentro do nosso coração.

Quem é o teu deus?

Aqueles que são cristãos, como o próprio nome já o diz, tem como Deus a Jesus Cristo de Nazaré. Nasceu da virgem Maria, cresceu e  morreu numa cruz e ressuscitou ao terceiro dia.

Outros são muçulmanos, porque creem em ALÁ e seu Profeta, Maomé. 

Outros creem , somente em Jeová, os hebreus.

Outro creem em Buda, são budistas. Isto para citar alguns mais conhecidos.

De tudo isto é você quem deve identificar  a quem você serve e ama.

Eu não sou cristão, pois o termo não representa mais aqueles que creem em Jesus Cristo, mas representa o interesse desta religião, Eu sou crente original, aquele que crê que Jesus Cristo é o filho de Deus, e junto comigo todos os cristãos, católicos, protestantes e afins, que o aceitam como seu único e verdadeiro Deus.

Como sei disto?

Porque Ele é a minha esperança e a minha vida. Por Ele eu morro, mas não mato. Por Ele eu oro por aqueles que me perseguem, difamam e caluniam. Por Ele eu, assim como Ele, abençoeim, ate mesmo os que me crucificaram.

E você? Qual é o teu Deus?

O dinheiro? 

O poder?

Os prazeres desta vida?  

Qual é o teu Deus?

The Law alive: Law Intuitive X Law Intelligent: New Vision For the Law

The Law alive:

Law Intuitive X Law Intelligent:

New Vision For the Law

Protected by copyright.

Authorized reproduction long as the source and the writer.

Sandro Rogério de Oliveira Souza
Contact:
sandrors1@gmail.com
rogeriodeoliveira@gmail.com

chapters:

1-Introduction
2-Concept:
3-Law Intuitive X Law Intelligent
4-Smart law:
5-Intuitive law:
6-Going beyond the concepts: The Art.
7-The meanings and senses:
8-The speech:
9-Examples of dead law:
10-The discourse:
11-The discourse as a device for the living law:
12-Conclusion:

**
Translated by Google translator

Writer:

Rogério Oliveira:

* Born in Ipatinga, Minas Gerais, Rogério Oliveira, whose full name is: Sandro Rogério de Oliveira Souza, studied at Bethany Evangelical Seminary, Brazilian branch of Bethany Fellowships, Blomington on the outskirts of Minneapolis, USA. It is majoring in law.
Keywords: law, live right, intuitive, intelligent, senses and speech.



Summary
In this article I present the concept of the living law such as the law that is constantly moving, not static but moving in space and time. Present the right intuitive X right intelligent, and the intuitive right the object of study of knowledge internally, and the smart right, the object of knowledge of external, objective. Show the vision of Regina Rossetti and Bergson who bring a new perspective to the right. I present as a device to understand the right way of living building of Julio Pinto and speech of Patrick Charaudeau of emotions as contemporary discursive strategy. 

Abstract
In this article I introduce the concept of the right, the the law Which is in constant motion, not static, but moving in space and time. Present the intuitive right x smart right and the right intuitive knowledge of the study object internally, and the right smart, knowledge of the object are external, objective. Show Regina's vision Rossetti and Bergson que bring new perspective of international law. Present the device to intuitively understand the law construction of the senses Julio Pinto and discourse of Patrick Charaudeau emotions the contemporary discursive strategy. Referendum items with the same Marcio Garcia, Delber Andrdae Lage, and Pebble.

Keywords: Right, right moving, intuitive, intelligent, and speech senses.

1-

Introduction



              The law is flow. The law is alive. The law is not static. As stated by Regina Rossetti, in his communication article, which is the beginning of this article: "The metaphor of life expresses well the dynamics of movements that constitute the communication" saying that communication, life for us law, "not ... it is inert or dead, on the contrary, consists of a complex of relationships constantly changing, as is the life. " (Rossetti, 2005)
Is bringing vision to the law of the field, I always made sure that the law is not is dead thing is today. A static right that does not move and does not bring innovations, an immutable law in the middle of changing relationships and to better themselves every day.
Positive law pursues a static law as static are the laws of positive science, as they are, they think many today, the immutable foundations of the world, the object that surrounds it and not enters to not only be objective. But the object that we want to study, right, is alive, is moving and is also dynamic.
He does not turn as well may seem, but if updated, becomes current and alive as it is given the attention it deserves right.
I want to present an updated view of the study of law, putting a new, updated communication perspective of it. Says Rossetti (2005), which in this quest, "we must realize this mobility and seek a method to monitor their own movements, follow their own boundaries and can thus meet their ever-changing nature" (Rossetti, 2005).
In this approach the right, you can no longer fix their eyes only on the object as if we could look at it, observe it and understand it without having contact with him. Need to get a new look to the right, and find a new point of (re) -Interpretation, a new starting point, that will lead us to understand the relationships that are waged among people, ethnicities, social classes and people as diverse, but perhaps are not, in essence, that different.
To paraphrase Ferrara: "In its phenomenological updates, the right becomes alive, multiple, mutable and resistant to the descriptions and explanations" (FERRARA, 2003, p.62).
Is multiplicity of duty, the vivacity and mutability of it, show it to us through multiple senses taking the right today. Law of the rich? The poor right? Right of all? This resists our deepest explanations of it. It is right that we need to (re) -submit people. Live right, moving right along with people, walking with them, not behind you, in time and space.

2-
Concept:

The concept of the law alive, moving law, is in Bergson, "which developed a radical critique of the positivist proposal for reasons of science, and proposed a new epistemology that took into account the moving essence of treated phenomena." (Rossetti, 2005).
According to the author, for Bergson, "the true knowledge is given by intuition, intuition is immediate knowledge, this meaning that the act of knowing happens directly, without mediation. Knowledge in which subject and object coincide, because the guy enters the object and knows in its essence "(Rossetti, 2005).
This feature of Bergsonian thought, brings us to the right it is moving, and if we want to understand it can no longer carry on as if it were static and could observe it and understand him out of it. For if we want to understand the object of our study, the right, we can not just stare at a property right, as it were, our object, fixed, unchanging and inert, but we must fleece as a right that moves in time and space.
For Rossetti (2005) Non immobility: Behind the movement, there is always movement, that is, behind the things change, move, there is a core which is itself movement as well.
For Bergson, Rossetti (2005), alive, moving means that which is movement, not only what moves, but it is the very living thing, the moving thing in essence and totality: that is, movement.
Also tells us: "The Bergsonian thought, is innovative in the tradition because he thinks an essence that is not what remains, but is that which changes constantly. Bergson calls this essential movement of the reality of life, we are given to know by intuition. " (Rossetti, 2005).
One possibility opened up by this new perspective would be the right dipped in "I" subjective, trying to understand why and for that stock, the movements of the right to legislate as to show the way. It would be how to anticipate in time and space the actions of a people, anticipating to their customs, legislating as a day will be needed, until the times change. Ahead, we will talk of intuition and intelligence.
The right to act not as a simple fisherman "fishing" in the sea of ​​life at sea relationships, facts to be standardized, but act as a marine biologist who knows and understands the environment where they live and interacted.
To continue our reflection on the theme, moving right, it is necessary to landfilling the definitions of terms and then proceed up the road. We are anticipating that we are moving, as moving is right.

3-

Law Intuitive X Law Intelligent 

For the French philosopher Henri Bergson, intuition is immediate knowledge, that is, the act of knowing happens directly, without mediation. For Rossetti (2005), which is known immediately is the essential movement of reality, is the change still things in time. (Rossetti, 2004, p.18).
From here, to understand the intuitive right, we need to distinguish between the intuitive right and the smart right. Separating them in exterior and interior right right. As the intellectual, the exterior, and the intuitive, the inside. The author says that it is possible that "intelligence is fixed along the lines of matter which is characterized by externality, and intuition, on the contrary, follows the movement of thought itself in its pure interiority." This means that while the smart looks right out of the object, circling, studying it and mapping, but without touching it, still this study, this "knowledge", a knowledge concerning the intuitive right enters the object interacts with it It is going to understand it in order not only outside but inside following your movement contours, and then understanding it in its entirety. Because depending on the point of view taken by the right of the object, it will not reach the whole. (Rossetti, 2005).
The object, the right, which is defined: as the law applicable to the company (CALHAU, 2011), and the guy who watches, intuition, become one with it, the subject follows its movement, they coincide pass to understand, to understand, to understand its essence, no longer see out, but it is understood inside.
Therefore, we can say that the views given by the analysis of intelligent law, which remains the separation between subject and object, are always outside what the right know, and if we want to meet the right as it is, we must enter the object also for its interior, and then know its essence. He warns Pebble saying: "Today, with the continued evolution," living law, "the recognition of the individual and of international organizations, the role of law has its boundaries extended beyond interstate relations," even though it remains under the normative production (ROSSETTI, 2005; CALHAU, 2011).

4-

Smart Law:

The smart law to express themselves on the subject, right, uses symbols, but also says Rossetti (2005):

Express something through symbols is express it in terms of what he is not, because the symbol describes something referring to another. Consequently, intelligence (smart right), speaks and thinks by outside means the same thing, so know its symbolic translation and not the original in your moving essence. (Rossetti, 2005).

This shows us that intelligent right uses symbols that are not the correct expression of the object. Using the intelligentsia, are made comparisons and arrive to erroneous conclusions about the law, which fall outside the intuitive right, because the law does not intelligent enters the object, then it needs to start seeking concepts, and concepts, being static, are fixed and can not keep moving the right. When we fix us and not we move along with the object, lost their essence and their movements, since the right moves and static concepts do not translate what he is. The smart right can not then know its true essence: the movement. "One must remember that the concept while crystallization of symbolic activity is the form it takes such activity when the pragmatic interest requires the establishment of mobility." (LEOPOLDO and SILVA, 1994, p.96).
The problem of symbols is that they are representations of representations, and sometimes take the place of the object. The object, right, can not be taken for a symbol, a meaning, because semiosis being the infinite generation of meanings (PINTO, 2007), we will be plastering the right in what he is most precious: their vivid and moving essence.
From this look we see that is a narrow view, a linear view and mechanics. A process transmissive to each other, which prepares messages and receive another without question. It's like the other receiver, it receives the message and it is accepted without question. It's superficial understanding of this smart law which fails to recognize the other an actor who thinks that produces senses, questions and you want a right to satisfy his senses.
 In understanding the construction of the senses, we can not give you even order where there is no beginning. In the construction of sense the subject is not paralyzed, defenseless against the powerful attack, this is very superficial understanding of directions between the speeches, one must consider the other in his speech, and not think that it is a discursive alienated, not You know how to defend. This receiver passivity has been more than abandoned, see Neto, Thompson and Verón.

5-

Intuitive law:

 Is construction of meaning is conflictual, says Charadeau. Because the intelligent / intuitive movement are in conflict, so that the senses of them born that make up the living law. (CHARADEAU, 2010, P.27).

Thus we see that the law is incomplete intelligent, in that it requires the intuitive right for, say, give it meaning. This leads us to understand that without the intuitive right, the world would be static and motionless, without fluency, for nothing would change and the power would always be saying the meaning, the meaning of things, without consideration of the other, but it is not what It is observed.
I believe that many of the difficulties are given here, the living law, moving, will be born of the conflict between intuitive and intelligent, according Charaudeau, but it seems to me that not only conflict lives the living law, but an amalgam of a blend of intuitive smart and right, from where will come the living law. When two rights, internal and external join, unite and become one, it will give the moving right, live right!
.
Rossetti (2005) in the closing remarks of his article says that "the first mediation of intuitive knowledge is language. All knowledge, from the intuition, can only be reported when mediated by language "(Rossetti, 2005). What makes knowledge visible intuited, ie palpable to others, is language. Through language we can see what is inside the object, we can understand and grasp the inside of the object, through language, senses, thoughts unspoken, said well, said no, and the damned will be tragos light .
Is mediation of language cause the interaction of the actors involved in the law. Sharing the same intuition ensure an interpersonal interaction between the subjects of the relationship (Rossetti, 2005).
We see that the share insights, not only of meanings but senses ensures interpersonal interaction between the subjects of the relationship, that disputes can be settled through the use of a language that brings both subject to a sense of harmony within a context. Instead of being only an objective, intelligent, surrounding the object, they, through a charaudeausiano legal contract will flow in this language, move the images and finally interact.
The intuitive law makes us participate in the moving act that does not just observe it from the outside, through a distant intellectual vision. What we have to look at the living law, through the intuitive law, is possession of the Original because we entered the object, we move with him, and not in translation fixed symbols, which are concepts concepts, because only the original brings alive and moving essence of the object, because as Rossetti says: so unique, can not express themselves if not for herself (Rossetti, 2005).

6-

Going beyond the concepts: The Art.

This knowledge mediated need to go beyond the concepts to reach intuition, and free themselves from rigid concepts and prefabricated to create "flexible representations, mobile, almost fluid, always ready to mold themselves on the fleeting forms of intuition" (BERGSON, 1984, p.19), and thus communicate its essence. It also says that we must draw inspiration from the art that is expressed more by images and metaphors and can give us the sense of a language capable of suggesting being (Brincourt, 1995, p.43). Thus, art becomes paradigm of expression of intuition and intuition points of communication possibilities evidence of the very essence of reality (Rossetti, 2005).
This is the challenge, build the right finding new ways to express it subjects to interact. In a crisis, a legal clash, in view of confrontation and violations of rights, founded in a language beyond the concept in a language of the senses, an infinite semiosis of legal, intelligent, intuitive, vivid and moving possibilities. A right that goes beyond himself.
 I believe then that it is necessary to bringing to light, we need to understand the construction of senses the right to not to be talking about the meanings of meanings and running in circles.

7-

The meanings and senses:

The meanings are not unique, the meanings are given in the external environment in the area of ​​intelligent right, while the senses are given in the internal context in the personal area of ​​enunciators / interpretants subject. This movement of conflict, amalgam, intelligent law, the intuitive right, that will form the senses of the living law.
Says Julio Pinto (2007), "the meaning will still be produced, because the sense is a being of the future (a living object and moving) a come-to-be. Sense is this: the future meaning in context.
      The direction is a direction that the meaning can be taken depending on the choices that the receiver do, depending on what hits or he wants to achieve. The sense is that the choice of the recipient will do to the senses or significances circulate. The sense is a non-linear concept, while the meaning is reaction to an action and therefore linear "(PINTO, 2007).
          Medrado and Spink (. 2004, p 41) tell us that meaning is a social construction, a collective enterprise, specifically interactive, through which people - in the dynamics of social relations historically and culturally dated localizadas- terms to build from which they understand and deal with the situations and phenomena around him.
Quoting Umberto Eco (1997), Pinto (2007) brings us the light reflections on the meaning, which in Eco's view, this would be to the dictionary, as well as the direction for the encyclopedia. While the dictionary attempts to summarize, find meanings for the meanings, the encyclopedia, looking for the senses in context. Use it, the encyclopedia, the intuitive right and not smart right.
         The context defined meanings, and in the plural, as are infinite directions that may come into being, be aware of the contexts where they are produced, will give advantages to those guys fought speeches in the legal scenario, legal or rights relationships.
           This is the intuitive right, the right that is direct knowledge, object of knowledge in its depth and essence, its contours and its nuances. Their meanings produced in each of their contexts, not an interpretation "superior", which so moldy, does not change anything, and only repeats the obvious existing meanings.
But we can not forget that one depends on the other, the intuitive right needs the right smart, and the smart right need the intuitive right.
The interior need from the outside, and vice versa. Because this construction we are doing is not full one hundred of the two factors, the goal and the intuitive.

8-

The speech:

             Julio Pinto gives an example that well defines this. He says about a movie of Lumière brother, baby snack: they put up a fixed camera focusing on a table in the garden. The fixed camera, it is worth remembering, works as a meaning: it forces us to look at where it looks and is extremely difficult to evade his authority. On the table is the baby, around whom the family gathers to feed him. The film's it. The Lumière brothers perhaps wanted a meaning: we will witness the baby snack, we will record the joy and happiness of this event of family life. However, after the showing of the film, one of the spectators commented: "I find it funny how the leaves are moving," or something. Interestingly, this viewer did not look at where the camera was forced to look. He looked at the periphery of the picture "producing a break, and it's break is a sense that was not proposed by the camera, produced by the context a new direction. (PINTO, 2007 p.84). These vanishing points, these senses, these conflicts of law, become more important than the static meanings of intelligent right, despite being created for it and depend on it to exist.
In discursive construction to present, the guy who sets the right presents your options other trying to create it your image and affect its decision. But the break in his intention, takes place at this time, the other receives enunciation and the (re) -interpreta according to their context, their senses, their noises, whether personal or collective, sending back to enunciating a new enunciation and a different perspective of what the other guy waiting. Then creates the discursive conflict in the law creating the semiosis between subjects, this infinite production of meanings, which is of law, this conviction discursive game. Going forward it will be necessary subjects, that clash area, find their points of convergence and one of them acting in convincing the other through his speech.
               For Bergson had to dispense with the symbols, meanings (Rossetti, 2005, p.253) because the signs are unpredictable entities, says Pinto, because the object is more than he is, no sign tells everything about your subject. (Pinto, 2007). In this understanding of the living law, we can not stick to only the meanings; they will be accompanied by noises, noises that must be debugged while it builds the senses, we must stick to the senses of the living law, which will be produced by the intelligent and right intuitive within the subject (Pinto, 2007). To paraphrase Pinto: "The right place is the way, so it is a place of the future, the absence of law, shortcomings in the relationship. I can not think of a smooth, monolithic entitled without cracks. Because a right without noise is not true! "(PINTO, 2007.p.88).
          The law is built step by step, towards the direction. The right is not unison, but polyphonic, is a right that is alive and moving, in speeches and partners, legal and polititicas relations, is alive and continually updates itself through the senses, intelligent and intuitive right, forming the living law and moving.
             But also says Charaudeau (2010) on enunciador / enunciatee, (transmitter / receiver), enunciatee / annunciator (emitter / receiver), where no one is only a receiver or only one issuer; here lies the error (or other arrangement) of many authors who give meanings, concepts issue, but the other, one forgotten, and their contexts, their senses, their noise, he not only receives, but also conveys, through its context, their understanding of their world, its macro-micro-cosmos, so our "concepts", preconceptions, predetermined, are often distorted for them.
             Things are always more than they are, no point in trying to simplify the law in its relations with: I say you do, I command you obey, I am, you are not, I build, you accept. The senses are built starting from their contexts. The right not enter the object, will not provide full and satisfactory response relationships that are present in today's society, with voices as diverse and demanding answers to their demands.
                Look demand increasingly common in society, the media for the recognition of homoafetiva union voices in favor, contrary voices are manifested and and ask for a response from the right. These contexts that arise require the right to update moves to respond act keep the demands of society. Because if it did at the time the intuitive right presented itself, it would not require a static, monolithic look right, frozen in time.

9-

Examples of dead law:

As late example on responses to a law moving quote: (a) full repeal of criminal devices, (Brazil's context), the seduction of crimes (art.217), violent abduction or through fraud (art.219) consensual kidnapping (art.220) and adultery (art.230); (B) inclusion of partners among the subjects crime of active mediation of another's lust (art.227, § 1); (C) suppression of the "honest" adjective, yoked to the noun "woman" in possession of sexual offenses by fraud (art.215) and indecent assault by fraud (art.216).
       Although the value for shoplifting, and the like. Honest woman lasted a century to the other in our law, adultery. You need to keep track of time, I'm not saying an outcry here and change everything, but when all no longer consider something offense, not that you keep it in the law.
Some of the general principles of law as a principle of good faith, the principle of obligation to repair the damage, will have equal meaning, but not laden with commitments among stakeholders in them, if looked at from only objectively, for the essence, the interior of object does not participate in the construction of the senses to the right. The context set every law of the participating actor the meaning of each principle for each actor, so there are no misconceptions and misunderstandings between his speeches, it is necessary that the actors interact, know the sounds that are part of each one, to understand meaning, thinking, waking and legislating accordingly in the field of law, where it will become clear if what one says is being understood and understood each other and saw-versa.

Herein Pinto (2010), Rossetti (2005) and Bergson (1997), Charaudeau (2010), converge. When the author says, "that to achieve this knowledge is essential to delve in the intimate reality of being and knowing its essence, and only intuition can give us that. This is because the intuition (intuitive right) enters the object and coincides with him and follows the contours of furniture inside move, therefore, able to achieve what he has more intimate, unique and singular: its essential movement. We call intuition here the sympathy by which we transport ourselves to the interior of an object to match what he has unique and consequently inexpressible "(BERGSON, 1984, p.14). So what the object is unique, its essence, can not be expressed by something other than himself. " (Rossetti, 2005).

10-
The discourse:

The law can not avoid the intuitive and stay only in the smart right, it loses the essence, loses understanding of senses, the legal objectivism is outdated in its form, the outer analysis must be pre - assigned or at least after, the inner analysis. So that both the externality on the interior of the studied object, the right, his senses, his noise, his speech is understood by the subjects that are interacting to seek the same way on the right.
Here I appropriate a chauraudousiana formula for speech circumstances:
DM (moving right) = DIn. (Intelligent Right) x DI (intuitive right). Charaudeau (2010 P.27).
This conflict, this amalgam, which takes place within the object and enunciators and interpretants subject, when it gives the training of the senses, is that then form the movement necessary to build moving right. Charadeau says that the phenomenon is a double movement. The first is exocêntrico (with an outer defined) is the second endocêntrico, (inner meaning). He says that this double movement, this conflict between meanings, internal and external subjects, that will be forming the senses, the senses of speeches and moving right at hand.

  Intelligent law is the objective perspective of the object, when mapped, the rodeamos, photographed its contours, but not we enter. It consists of cultural views outside, visions we have of disinterested right of the object. As much as it seems that the objective view has object of knowledge, it always shows no interest in him absolutely, is always distant, and so always incomplete.
Intuitive right is intuitive perspective, inside this object, when we enter it and become one with it. The understand, understand the context for its characteristics and not only cold and disinterested observation, but an interested and contextualized view of it.

Let us light the way we propose in this perception of law, as the subject (we) should go towards this object, moving right, as the "seeing" separated from reality, but it can not be only "contemplating it," but You must enter it to map it, photograph it and study it from outside and inside. And the way to this study, for this understanding, is speech.

11-

The discourse as a device for the living law:

In his preface Charaudeau says the language is proper to man, and it allows you to think and act. It also enables him to live in society, to interact maintain contacts with equal and different. And that without it man, or even society would not exist, for it is the glue that holds them together. Is it the power of man.
But this language is built through contact, the exchanges between people of different peoples and relationships between people. There are simple grammar rules or words of dictionaries, we believe it is a human activity on the move in domestic and foreign social theater of our daily relationships, building senses, being aware of the beliefs and knowledge of society, which take into account the contexts and the speeches.
So is produced and operates according to the author, the relationships between subjects with directions and social ties. (Groups, organizations, states, nations, individuals) that will interact in a communicative process.
The point here is that thresh the speech in pathos, the "emotions," here referring to what Patrick Charaudeau says: "As regards me, I am content simply to say that it would be necessary to differentiate the notion of" feeling " the notion of "emotion." It seems to me that the first would be much more linked to the moral order, while the second would be mainly on, the order of the sensible.



        

            


12-

Conclusion:

When faced with daily events, we see that those who are militating in law must be prepared to face the challenges with weapons that enable you to understand, to dialogue and discursive clash.
The modes of discourse, the linguageiras attitudes, relations between the partners formed the speech that the right of workers were to handle know to succeed in their jobs. Whoever is better prepared will be the one who will win the communicational impact.
Those who build the living right, then to build his speeches on the basis that it is the construction of the senses through intelligent right and the intuitive right, built an updated and dynamic law, which responds to their demands.
When videos taken by mobile arrive at the home of millions of people, showing acts of terrorism, such as beheading and gays being thrown from rooftops to the death marches dissolved the machine gun shots or even gauge aircraft point 50. When women are stoned and their hampered rights when companies throw their debris, whether radioactive or not, on land and at sea, contaminated them, the right people need to present prepared to give an answer to height, is the company facing your media demanding a response.
        In a contradictory discourse still little studied, we are led to see that the struggle is in the speech, one that work best speech will take advantage of this moving right at hand.

Bibliography:

ALMEIDA, Maria Leticia. Dialogism and polyphony. 2000, available at: http://www.unitau.br/scripts/prppg/humanas/download/dialogismo-N1-2003.pdf
Bakhtin, Mikhail: discourse on life and discourse on art. In: DIETZSCH, MJ (Ed.) Spaces of language in education. São Paulo: Humanitas, 1999, p. 11-39
Charaudeau, Patrick. Language and speech. 1. ed. São Paulo: Context 2009, p. 43-63 and 67-79.
Charaudeau, Patrick. Speaking of media. Sao Paulo. Ed. Context, 2007.
CHARADEAU, Patrick. Pathos and political discourse. In: MACHADO, Ida Lucia; Menezes, Willian; MENDES Emilia (Eds). The emotions in speech. Rio de Janeiro: Lucerne, 2010. P. 240 -251.
Calhao, A. Judicial Celerity. Available in: http://ernanicalhao.com.br/celeridadejudicial/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=72:as-interfaces-do-direito-internacional-e-economico&catid=35:artigos&Itemid=59. Accessed: 20/06/2011.
GARCIA, Márcio. Difference on asylum and refuge. Available in:
http://fichasmarra.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/marcio-garcia-fala-da-diferenca-sobre-asilo-e-refugio/. Accessed: 20/06/2011
LAGE, Delber Andrade. Obama's visit perspectives. 2011 Hoje em Dia. Available em:http://www.hojeemdia.com.br/cmlink/hoje-em-dia/colunas-artigos-e-blogs/blog-de-opini-o-1.10994/perspectivas-da-visita-de-obama-1.254940. Accessed: 20/06/2011
PINTO, Julio. Organizational communication and communication in the context of organizations? In: OLIVEIRA, Ivone L. SOARES, Ana Thereza. N. Interfaces and trends of communication in the context of organizations. São Caetano do Sul, SP. Diffusion 2008. P. 81-9.
SANTOS, Andrea Cristina Souza belt Baêta of Renault; PAULA, Francine Machado et al. International Humanitarian Law. The symbolism of human rights in humanitarian intervention in Somalia. Jus Navigandi, Teresina, year 15, no. 2518, May 24 2010. Available at: . Accessed on 15 June 2011.
SOUZA, Sandro Rogério de Oliveira. Law and Pathos: The speech and emotions. 20111. Available in: http://www.webartigos.com/articles/57595/1/O-Direito-e-o-Pathos-O-discurso-e-as-emocoes/pagina1.html#ixzz1PgXX9pgo. Accessed: 20/06/2011.