Fábio Frizzo

The purpose of this article is to reinforce the alert that the German philosopher Hans Jonas makes in his work Principle responsibility for the imminent possibility of a tragic end of history for humanity if the unpredictable effects arising from the form of action of the liberal political-economic system and the inconsequential advance of the technology that follows are considered. In this intention, we chose as a strategy, to weaken and oppose the Hegelian idea, opposed to Jonah's view, that there would be no cause for alarm because history, in its development, is guided by an immanent and well-intentioned reason that inevitably leads humanity towards the realm of freedom and the absolute spirit. More recently, the American philosopher, economist and political scientist Francis Fukuyama, seeking support in Hegelian thought decreed that history had come to an end with the culmination of the sociocultural evolution of humanity. In this context, we initially seek to present an interpretative analysis of the ideas of Hegel and Fukuyama, and then to make a critique a of this way of thinking, in the light of Hans Jonas' arguments. Finally, it is concluded, through the Jonasian lens, that the story, in addition to not having reached its end, as Fukuyama stated, may also have a quite different ending from that imagined by Hegel. Therefore, one should not disregard the occurrence of the hypothesis of an essential death followed by a physical death of the human race, well before the Hegelian project of freedom has a chance to take place. In doubt, it is better for man to be wary of the existence and of the intention and of the capacity of an imminent reason and to retake in time the reins of his own destiny, through the adoption of a new ethical principle: that of responsibility.