With a point of view coming mainly from (not on) sport, we try to understand how Man (living beings) work. We did a conceptual disruption with perceptions that are fundamentally descriptive or aggregates of events. Having sport as a laboratory not to collect data, lots of data, but to understand Man. Man as the phenomena we want to study, Man as the observer and Man that defines the signals that can be used to connect (establish dialectics) phenomena and observers, we started from the point of view of the instrument sport and as a mean of education.

The paradoxes met made us go further and further and seek for a rupture looking for a functional perspective where we try to understand Man as a functional unit. A unity that evolved following very simple principles, as is usual in nature, that obeys not at esoteric entities (what could explain everything, explaining nothing) but of a sequence of events, a process, a process that is responsible for transformation (evolution) and starts always with a Stimulus/Aggression (a stimuli that must be enough to "disturb" the normal functioning of the individual, but also cannot exceed the limits of safety, where there is an injury - be it mechanical, psychological, social, etc.); an Aggression that trigger a reaction in the individual; what causes an Adaptation, resulting from reaction to stimuli; and then a Transformation occurs when there is a consolidated adaptation with a permanent character, even if it is a provisional stay that disappears if there are no requests that justify the cost of preserving it. So, an action has no place if there is no factor that performs the activation function. We need a trigger so that a transformation/adaptation process happens.

We had to adapt the methodology to the complexity of the problem but we can say that generally and schematically we followed a line of construction of the conjecture based on the hypotheses that we were raising and the subjection to the refutation, exhaustive, orderly and constantly, based on the knowledge that we could dispose in the different areas of knowledge associated or correlated.

We present some examples to illustrate the implications of the rupture proposed, trying to ease the understanding of the adaptations we defend and its complexity. A complexity that underlie many areas of knowledge, so a dialogue can be extremely rich.

Our area of study and research is Sport, which in a punctual and disaggregated view could lead us to refer to a position of users, consumers or a support approach that other areas of knowledge, namely orthopedics, give to sports in the solution of injuries.

Yet we think we can, and should, go a little further. In times of change, such as the ones we are living today, it is necessary to make a conceptual disruption, which is to fill the space between the different areas of knowledge that have in common man as object of study, the same man who embodies a multiplicity of roles, either as the phenomenon or as the observer, or even as the structure that defines the signals that can be used to connect (establish dialectics) phenomena and observers.

Sport is a phenomenon that has multiple functions and varied ways of performing them. It can be a spectacle, a mean of alienation (social, personal, familiar, educational, etc.), a mean of education, of health, etc... But it can also be a laboratory where one can test and seek to refute theories and conjectures about man and his functionalities and dimensions. And note, being a laboratory, it is a laboratory of extremes, extremes of the investments made, extremes of the freedoms that are taken in the trials made, extremes of the commitments assumed, extremes of the disclosure that enrolls, etc..

However, so that sport can be a laboratory in a current context, it is fundamental that it does not limit itself to collect a vast set of data, no matter how rigorous and accurate the harvest (observing a perspective of logical empiricism or positivism), creating huge repositories of information that is difficult to trace and which is restricted to a role of animation of social information that serves to fill spaces where inspiration and knowledge do not allow us to go further.

Data that already exists is abundant. It is the result of technological development that allows us to measure 'anything and everything', in a detailed way and without great difficulties or costs. Contrariwise we do need relevant data (even when they may be impertinent and cumbersome, avoiding the lack of intellectual seriousness so often dominant in these areas with the excuse of emotions) framed with a development strategy and with well-defined goals.

It is fundamental a rupture at the level of knowledge that allows abandoning the 'reigning empiricisms' and the vision and transmission of mere techniques, to a conceptual support to understand and explain the functionalities based on explanatory models that allow us to understand and to explain the assimilation of phenomena objectively and with intentionality (or intentionalities). More than detecting effects, it is essential to seek and understand the underlying causalities.

In this sense, it is not enough to try to explain everything on the basis of the explanatory conception that man, like all other living beings, develops his transformations fundamentally by mere accidents and natural selection that has enormous costs and depends on excessive weight of chance of mutations or similar, as argued namely by Darwin.

Or, on the contrary, in an 'intelligent design' which, paradoxically, at least in appearance, conflicts with the 'free will' espoused by some. Conflicts that exist too with the advocates of determinism that other 'types of fixisms' defend on their side. These are two extremes, with many shifting in the middle. But all within the same logic of man's subjugation to esoteric wills.

Those are positions, however, that contradict and conflict with the notion of training, personal effort for development, drill and education that imply the commitment of the individual, as well as investment in health, treatment and search for a balance that we call health, or the effort developed to avoid the disease. Chance is powerful, but we believe that whatever this chance maybe it will not go that far.

Thus, in a functional logic, we propose (Almada, Fernando, Lopes, & Vicente, 2018) [1], with an operant sense and a reasonable perspective, a coherence that although presented here in a simplified way, a simple sequence (simplicity is a desirable characteristic when we seek to understand natural processes), and an accessible and intelligible coherence that translates into the following steps that lead the evolutionary process in all aspects of the development of a living being and, of course, passing through man as well.

An evolutionary process that includes the following steps:

• When subjected to an aggression reacts (‘intentionally’, ‘instinctively’, ‘rationally’, ‘conscientiously or not, automatically, etc.);
• By seeking to adapt in order to reduce the effects of aggression and increase its chances of efficiency or even survival.

So, we have a process, a sequence that succinctly includes:

• The Stimulus/Aggression - By aggression we understand the stimulus (or set of them) that hold the necessary characteristics (intensity, duration, frequency, etc.) to trigger a reaction in the individual. The dosage of these stimuli must be enough to "disturb" the normal functioning of the individual, i.e. not allowing the individual simply to ignore them, but also cannot exceed the limits of safety, where there is an injury (be it mechanical, psychological, social, etc.);
• The Reaction - The reaction is like a first approach to the stimuli, often performed even intuitively by the individual and that can go already towards the adaptation or sometimes only in an adjustment of the dosage (intensity, duration, frequency, etc.) that may lead to the desired (even if not conscientiously intended) transformation;
• The Adaptation - Adaptation, resulting from reaction to stimuli, is a process that can respond to the effects of stimulus / aggression. Sometimes for the same set of stimuli different adaptations are possible, so that it meets the defined objectives. It is often necessary to look for and try to create the most appropriate stimulus matrix for the situation, the individual and the context.

On the other hand, it is also difficult to isolate an adaptation. As a rule, there are always "collateral" adaptations that must be managed in such a way that they do not overlap with the main adaptation or do not hinder the intended evolutionary direction.

It is possible to distinguish various types of adaptations, the punctual or fleeting ones when they tend to disappear with the absence of the aggression (however ‘something’ can remain, i.e. ‘experience’, knowledge’, whatever), or the permanent ones that last beyond the direct effect of the aggression.

• The Transformation - Transformation occurs when there is a consolidated adaptation with a permanent character, even if it is a provisional stay that disappears if there are no requests that justify the cost of preserving any structure by simple it may be (see, for example, the case of a callus, which is a resistance to an aggression, but which in the absence of the stimulus will tend to disappear). So there are economic strategies in this adaptation/ transformation that again can be intentional’, ‘instinctive’, ‘rational’, ‘conscientious’, automatic, etc...

A process of transformations is thus achieved. Their sense does not have to depend on mere chance because the individual can have an action of intentionality, obtaining an intended evolutionary sense, for good or evil (concepts of good and evil are subjective and depend on the context and from the assumed perspective). And the individual can be helped by a teacher, a coach, a doctor, through a study, exercising intelligence, previous experiences, etc...

Changes in muscle, bone, joint, skin or other organs, the coordination of various organs, the functionality integrated in the concept of biotype (biome) and the apprehension of the different organic connections, as well as the basis (material or else) for habits, emotions, sensibilities, ‘cultures’,… everything that determine a being. What includes, naturally, and even, the interactions of the generation of an individuality that makes, certainly, what we call the individual, thus gain a dimension which they did not have before.

This by the intervention of an intentionality (that has not to have a conscientious intentionality), that at the end ‘yields’ a functional unit. A functional unit that goes beyond the simple mechanistic view of the agglomeration of 'pieces' that when worn can be replaced.

It is a little further than Gordon Childe, as we refer below, did say "Man makes himself".  It justifies, in this way (an alternative - the condition that allow a rupture, as defended by Thomas Kuhn), the rejection of the simple mechanistic view, since it no longer responds to the problems with which we are debating today. And, simultaneously, this gives the knowledge and other tools of action that we need to go further in the strategies and operations we practice, so that we can be more profitable and efficient. For instance, by the definition of laws and principles – the principle of economy, as we saw above - that simplify understanding or even refutations.

In this sense, another view can be reached from other works such as those that result in the understanding of different visions of man like for example, considering those extreme cases:

• The perspective with a sociological dimension that Gordon Childe developed and published, particularly in the book "Man makes himself" (1939), in the distant 30's;
• The functional notion of "mental schema" developed by one of us (Almada) in his work towards obtaining a PhD degree at the end of the last century (1980s).

But, another example, gains also a dimension and practical sense the use of statistical notions that are embedded in the behavior of some types of ants that 'mark ways to follow' by the intensity of the 'scents' left in the ones that are most trodden because they have a sense (illustrating how an intentionality is shaped) and so are more noticeable.

If we extend the process of the behaviors and effects that we have just presented in relation to the ants (which integrates aspects ranging from the objectives, to the communication of intentions to other members of the group, to statistical notions, to social dynamics, etc.), that we can consider a simplified model of the articulation of the functionalities that go from the individual to the social structures and extrapolate to an understanding and explanation of the man integrating the different aspects (to facilitate considering the different areas of knowledge existing or others that may be defined) and we use the above-described process of the stimulus/reaction/adaptation/transformation sequence, in its central aspects but also in the collaterals, we will have a different view of the problematic of Man. A vision that becomes functional and globalizing, establishing connections between prisms under which we have studied Man, but in an integrated and cohesive way, which leads to new coherences.

Synthesizing

• From the musculoskeletal point of view, the relation between the sequence that goes from the stimulus to the transformation is (apparently, considering, in particular, the existence of white and red fibers and the implications they have for the energetic processes involved…, the problem is a bit more complex) direct;
• From the physiological point of view, it is already necessary to consider phenomena that are not so evident, which makes the relation between the existing stimuli and the requested performances difficult, and the resulting effects become somewhat less visible;
• From the psychological point of view, the relationship between the psychic aspects and the material support in which they are supported, despite the efforts to corelate the nervous system (which is not as easy to integrate as some would like to do), complexity increases, which would not be serious if it did not allow the introduction of concepts that are relatively vague and purely ideological;
• From the sociological point of view, the problems mentioned in the previous point increases exponentially;
• If we consider the integration of the four previous points by subjecting a conditioning grid in which we try to integrate the stimulus/reaction/adaptation/transformation sequences, in their central aspects but also in the collaterals, the complexity increases but we have a guide that does not allow extrapolation to conceptual uncertainties that introduce noise and artifacts into the process. However, the inconsistencies become more evident and deep reformulations are required.

Of course, many more aspects of the understanding of Man must be introduced by imposing new conceptions, new lines of inquiry, new perspectives, etc., which, however, we do not think fit within this article, also for space and simplification reasons, but that should be developed and further developed.

Returning to the analysis that we were carrying out, we will have, for example, meaning and intentionality thus cease to be relatively strange conceptions, even hermetic, in order to gain a coherent and... Practical reality. As we just saw an action has no place if there is no factor that performs the activation function. We need a trigger so that a transformation/adaptation process happens.

We need stimulus, incentives, incitements, aggressions, stimulators, motivators or even blow s, insults, and so many other modes of interaction that establish a cause/effect relationship(s).

So causes and effects really happen. Sometimes we forget it. The attraction for the magical, the fantastic, the wonderful that we see developing in the movies that nowadays attract crowds are, we think, an effect that is caused by the removal of more and more people from the ability to understand a more complex and, therefore less 'instinctive' science .

This effect may, in turn, be a cause that if amplified by the virtual reality and by the technologies that allow man to submerge himself in scenarios that are increasingly distant from the real (whatever this real may be) can be a mean of alienation that may be really dangerous (for individuals, see above how individuality is generated, or even for societies).

The wide range of terms used to serve as a source, a detonator of the process, is, we think, not only a good indicator of the complexity of the problem, but also, which is complementary to that complexity, a sign of the many fields of knowledge in the different approaches, methodologies, perspectives, interpretations and frameworks that must be taken into account when looking for a more in-depth analysis of this phenomenon or set (another revealing of the different facets of the phenomenon and how, as a consequence, the way it is viewed by observers unfolds, in a strategy we’ve referred to and deal with in different points of this manuscript) of phenomena.

One way of combating this alienation without, however, stifling its potentialities (in the same way, the imagination can bring dangers but is, concurrently, a powerful tool for development) could be the development of the capacity to understand and explain the phenomena integrated in their processes, in instead of seeing them as independent and loose events that seem to come out of nowhere and do not change at all because they have neither past nor consequences for the future. This is what we try to do too, with this work.

In this way, we have a functional perspective (the integration of the different functions and their practical justification) that gives consistency to forms of action and behaviors (perhaps even justifying the notion of life, of being alive), and legitimize the conception of the individual's intervention in its constitution and construction.

Constitution and construction that imply (solicit) 'wills' and purposes, resolutions and decisions. Thus, we have an intelligent design that springs from the individual himself, adding wills, intentions, resolutions, projects, etc., which can therefore be worked out in their origin, objectively and intentionally targeted. Again as Gordon Childe would tell us, "Man makes himself" - reacts, adapts, transforms…

The debate of - education, training, treatment, school, health, their strategies (pedagogies and didactics), the tools they use and the effects (central or collateral) that produce... and many other conceptions and ideas essential for the understanding of man (of living beings?) and his actions and ways of acting, gains a depth and a dimension that it did not had because we can in this way work their causalities and not only attend to their effects and results.

The consequences that arise and we can foresee (statistically, for example), that despite the difficulties, can be conditioned and we can give them an intentionality and a rationality resulting from the integration of rational and intention, because we perceive the underlying aspects.

Dream and project are the result of requests and become tools of the individual's life process. The fantastic can become a creative imagination and the above mentioned risks can be something positive (with the inherent advantages for processes such as education, training, health as a state of equilibrium,...).

The problem we present and confront here is complex. Complex, as we mentioned above, not only by the different facets that compose it, but also and perhaps even more so, because it implied a wide set of breaks and readjustments of which we will cite some.

• Dependence on various areas of knowledge. Areas that still function in relatively isolated ways, with methodologies and even foundations at the level of knowledge that are sometimes divergent or even contradictory;
• The transformations that constantly take place in knowledge (in parallel with the occurring of our study and research – during dozens of years, literally) requiring adaptations and reformulations that are sometimes profound and demanding - a good example is the evolution of the conceptions about the nervous system where it was heresy to think that it could add new structures, besides as it is evident of new synapses, or the myelination of some fibers, passing through many forms in a set of wires, channels of signal transmission, until we reach what is now accepted in their dialectics between  the different structures, the connection to the biome and even the possibility of transmitting transformations from generation to generation (a neo-Lamarckism that no longer shocks because we have reached the precision that allows us to treat phenomena at levels where some phenomena become perceptible);
• The (natural) resistances to change;
• The different conceptions and concepts such as education, training, instruction, health, coaching, sport, etc., and of the contexts where they are integrated.

Generally and schematically, we could say that given the complexity of the problem dealt with, methodologically we followed a line of construction of the conjecture based on the hypotheses that we were raising and the subjection to the refutation, exhaustive, orderly and constantly, based on the knowledge that we could dispose in the different areas of knowledge associated or correlated.

However, in the dialectic framework in which we evolved, the notion of a development of this work following a spiral in which the questions were linked with the answers that we could successively formulate and consolidate (or refute) in which the scope was extended progressively, would be more precise although more difficult to delimit and of apprehending.

But in fact, the long process which we follow is ‘much more complex’ (though generally it consists in successions of conjectures and refutations, refutations that require change of direction or proceed with adjustments and care that become necessary and demandable according to the course done).

A process that has gone through many formulations and ways of acting adapted to the problems faced and to the specific capacities that exist.

A work that was directed predominantly to the space of connections and to the dialectics that these favor or imply, although, certainly, the construction of the syllogism requires the truth of the premises, and that can be refuted by the existence of an event that leaves the norm (such as a point may cast doubt on the validity of a curve without any number of points being able to prove its truth).

The search, as exhaustive as possible, in the most diverse areas of knowledge, in publications of specialty, or more generic because these open the range consulted without such high costs, led us to face different perspectives and conceptions, and to seek in dialogue with specialists from as many areas of knowledge as possible, consolidating as much as we could get the potentials of refutation that could call into question the whole.

And yet, despite the consolidation of the thoughtful and understanding of what we present grow with time and past evidence, we continue to wait in the contradictory, the delimitations of the framework and dimensions in which what we defend is acceptable and useful… or else.

Presentation of some practical implementation situations:
An Operational Framework of Exemplification
What we will present next is not a set of premises where we most support ourselves to defend the position we look after here, but, as we have just said, practical situations of application of an operational framework of exemplification.

As we presented in the indication of the followed methodological guidelines, it would be boring and arid a search for solidity based on the number of data presented. And the same is true of the bibliography that could be cited.

However, from the conceptual framework presented above, operational forms and strategies are not always evident in a first approach, and we deem it important to present some examples to illustrate the underlying implications.

Once a functional perspective is grasped, the impositions to be accepted in the operational processes become direct. Being these processes (processes that can be isolated in events to facilitate their study and understanding, but events are always integrated in a process or processes because they are sequences of causalities/causes that in turn give rise to consequences, that become new causalities/causes) composed of sequences where we can introduce factors to condition changes in trajectories but which have functional foundations that we can try to understand and even adapt, but not eliminate (think, as an example, the mass of a body, or the ’’consumption’’ of a combustible).

In these processes the ideological cannot be constructed on the basis of beliefs and processes of faith but is conditioned by laws and principles, and ways of functioning that we can try to understand and extract as conjectures that result from the conditions on which they are based, a dialectic causes » consequences. The capacity we have is to change trajectories as it happens in any area of knowledge where evolution is aimed. We can look for diverse coherences or better efficiencies, but not ‘to build from nothing’. Even immaterial things such as, thoughts, opinions or feelings. Sport with its permanent evaluation (results) and pragmatism is a concrete example of the importance of the factors at play and the limits they impose.

Education, however, lives from a set of accepted implications as bases often dominated by visions built on values and ideals or beliefs, hopping for results/consequences that can be only aspirations or ambitions but that can be only hopeful expectancies. One of the most evident is the acceptance that the acquisition of more knowledge will generate a positive educational effect, although it is evident and accepted that knowledge and wisdom are completely separated processes from a functional point of view (and sometimes contradictory ones).

Operationalizing forms of action coherent with this conceptual framework implies personalizing the way we use sport - along the lines of what we nowadays believe it is also tried in medicine. What in some ways contradict with the adaptation of the treatment by averages and imposes starting to consider the individual specificities, that is, to use methodologies diagnosis/prescription/control, but not only from the references but attending too the specificities of each case.

A strategy of action that becomes possible today because we begin to have 1 - the necessary instruments, 2 - the resources (the wealth) available for their execution, 3 - the knowledge on which to base the operationalization of the processes and, perhaps the most important, 4 - the ability to design a frame of reference that allows the aggregation of the different factors in game in order to idealize and realize efficient ways of pursuing the desired objectives, as well as prospective operational frameworks that allow us to project ourselves in the future.

Given the justification and conceptualization on which we are based, which here is evidently brief and therefore not very thorough, we shall now give a summary of the case.

It should be noted that we have gone from a presentation of cases, events, to a process in which the different stages and sequences presented above are coherently articulated, and then to give concrete examples of their application in the understanding and explanation of some situations (hoping, in this way, to motivate the search of the deepening of the subject and the opening of debates between different areas of knowledge that, because we deal with processes, are always complementary, in the perspectives that offer of the... 'Reality'). Thus, as a way of clarifying the positions that we presented and defended above, we will present some examples of the presented contents:

Didactics
Didactics can be defined by the methods and techniques that make it possible to create an efficient learning strategy for the individual.

However, today, and considering the frame of reference that we have already explained, it is no longer coherent to work for an average (but not because of ideological point of view, or to give job to more people, but to reach different objectives and follow more efficient ways, as well as to avoid collateral conditionings that generate ‘habits’ and to get used to errors that are difficult to outdo). It is fundamental to consider the individual specificities and to request a personalized learning that is appropriate to the evolutionary/formative process of each one.

Nor is it coherent that this process focuses on a logic of repetition and the transfer of techniques without a well-defined intentionality.

Some questions are essential: Why this set of aggressions and not another? What adaptations and transformations do we want to achieve? What will really happen, why and how?

Answering these questions then we need to understand how we can do it in the most cost-effective possible way (minimizing costs and/or maximizing benefits) and not navigate by the river by letting luck lead us wherever.

A laboratory situation: The treadmill problem and the process/results relationship
In a study we (Catarina, Prudente, Lopes, & Vicente, 2018) [2] performed using the treadmill to understand the energy costs of different displacement strategies, we subjected one group of individuals to two different situations.

In situation 1 the individual moved for 10 minutes with the speed variation, but without any conditioning, while in situation 2, keeping all other conditions, marks were introduced on the treadmill that he had to avoid treading.

Comparing the two situations, we found that in situation 1 the individual, besides adapting to the speed (which happens only every 2 minutes and is very slight - between 0.5-1Km/h) can use a type of practically automated displacement without the need for major adjustments or decision-making, already in the situation 2 each given step implies a decision-making process (collecting and processing stimuli so as to choose a place where you can put the support in order to be able to continue with your march).

As we expected it was found that the Heart Rate (HR), indirect indicator that we used to assess energy consumption, was much higher in situation 2 where constant decision-making was required. Another interesting fact was that it was not the individuals with a better performance in situation 1 who presented better results in the situation 2.

But more important than the data obtained, are the questions that allow us to extrapolate and that can be useful for the educational and formative process of the individuals, namely: Are there individuals with a tendency to move in a more automated way and others with greater tendency to make decisions during its motor action? Is this tendency influenced by previous experiences and, therefore, will it be possible to be transformed through the pedagogical process? Is the pedagogical process promoting the most appropriate transformations for each individual?

A tennis situation - possible requests and strategies for comparing
In the evolution of a player there are capacities that vary throughout his growth having some more meaning than others because they can change the dynamics of the game processes.

Muscular strength is one of them and allied to technical evolution can have great effect on speed of service. When the service reaches a speed of, for example, 100Km/h, the opponent's ability to respond can focus on stimuli such as the ball and its trajectory, for about 0.72s (time it takes to reach its field ) it is possible for the player to make his decisions, prepare his response and hit the ball back.

However, when by the process of evolution of the players the service starts to reach speeds of approximately 170Km/h, the time the ball takes to move to the service zone (0.42s) becomes less than the ‘usual’ time for a complex reaction (0.55s) which means that the player to receive the service needs to anticipate the movement of the opponent. That is, the set of stimuli that he have to focus on in order to succeed are completely different; if the player along his course has developed a set of adaptations to react to the ball and adapt accordingly, he may have a better performance in the short term but in the medium/long term, when the level of play to which it has to respond evolved, the previous adaptation will negatively influence his possibility of evolution.

In a process of formation, the sense of the adaptations and transformations requested to the individual should be based on an intentionality and an evolutionary strategy that aims to reach the objectives defined not only in the short term, but mainly in the medium and long term.

From the information we have just presented it is possible to understand that we can be preparing people to enter into dead-ends by making them evolve in the wrong direction and withdrawing them or making it difficult to reach higher levels of performance precisely (paradox) because they followed our guidelines. What responsibility does the coach have in these cases?

Of course that another possible strategy is to let this evolution happen by chance and in a Darwinian logic expecting some of the players to survive and achieve high performances. But in this case what is a coach for?

Certainly other solutions present themselves, but they need to be defined, validated and investigated. Here, in this article, we give the solutions for this work.

Understanding man in his functionalities and knowing the parameters and limits in which he can work is fundamental, so that we can make pertinent and efficient decisions and therefore that they can be justified. It is not enough to use reasonable solutions, it is imposed (through professionalism and ethics) the search for 'the best solution', because only then can we provide an acceptable service.

Understanding man, his characteristics and limits, as well as the features he presents are parameters that underlie many areas of knowledge, areas that naturally focus in different phenomenon and characteristics. Looking at man from different perspectives is a wealth to share and should not be a factor of separation and isolation.

Above we have left a note – “…their application in the understanding and explanation of some situations (hoping, in this way, to motivate the search of the deepening of the subject and the opening of debates between different areas of knowledge…”.

We believe that the dialogue between different areas of knowledge on the perspectives they have of their point of view about man and how to treat his functionalities is important because all of us are treating the same man - man as a phenomenon and object of study, man as an observer and man as a limiting sign that can be used in the relationship between the phenomenon and the observer - this dialogue can be extremely rich by the learning it can afford and at a relatively low cost. Another rupture to do. We are therefore not only open to dialogue but also seeking to implement it.

Conflict of Interest
The Authors declare they have no conflict of interests.