Abstract

In an alienated society, a disalienating practice is possible, or even in such an unfree order, a human being as an individual can realize a disalienating practice, which suggests their ontological structure, their decision-making position. In other words, the human being has an immanent ability to act in a non-free order, as Gajo Petrović points out, a “free personality”, or to be on the path to disalienation. On the other hand, in a society whose institutionalization is conducive to the development of a free personality, if such societies exist at all, alienated personalities are realized, which also suggests the human being’s identical ontological structure, the aforementioned decision-making position. In such a given situation, the question arises, so to speak, of the bearer, the location, i.e., the place of assumption of disalienating practice. As an answer, Petrović suggests “revolutionary thinking”. Namely, revolution thinks the novum – i.e., previously unrealized content.