<br/>Philosophers have never conceived their theses as contingent on a given epoch: rather, they have conceived them as absolute values, applicable at all times, with a tendency to believe in all-encompassing visions of the world, legitimized to know and act, without regards to the historical moment.<br/><br/>They also justified any obvious overcoming of the social phase, convinced that they know the suitable means for emancipation, for the progressive path of man and of history.<br/><br/>But we, today, are discouraged by the macro-systems legitimized to transcend and overflow on everything, we are convinced of the inexistence of ultimate and unitary foundations.<br/><br/>Therefore, if "esse est percipi", to exist is to be perceived, this also concerns the mill of Don Quixote, which would be a mill for Aristotle, rigorously bringing all substances back to their own category, but also a dangerous bandit for the mad knight who thus perceives its existence. Indeed: can material reality, chemistry and physics exhaust the knowledge of the world? Are you a reductionist, for whom everything is explained in the relationship between lightning and oak hydrocarbons? On the contrary, philosophers have the weakness of wanting to explain what is incomprehensible: therefore we invite you to read how philosophers develop a logical path for phylein (loving) sophya (wisdom).