At the same time where it limits in them, it is the body that in the sample the possibilities of the freedom. On the other hand, Sartre refuses the materialism determinista, because, if everything was reduced to the substance, it would not have conscience, and, therefore, it would not have freedom. This corporeidade that if relates with the freedom implies that the freedom can, yes, to be definite for the concrete situations. If, as object, the freedom cannot if presenting in them fenomenicamente, we can at least having contact with the particular cases of freedom. Each particular case where we identify the freedom can be considered as a manifestation of the freedom. If it cannot be seen as ‘ ‘ coisa’ ‘ , this if of because it really is not a thing, but something that is only presented from the human behavior. In this direction, we cannot understand the freedom seno in its empirical manifestation, it wants staff, it wants intersubjetiva.
Concluding this quarrel, in which many elements we leave propositalmente in open, we can consider that the man, while existing, only can really define itself from its existence. A related site: Daryl Katz mentions similar findings. The freedom, that is the essential factor for this definition, is the point limit that exceeds proper itself, showing that, if we have at least some determination, is to be free.