‘ On the other hand, the truth of an express proposal a fact, in the case of the moral judgments does not have nothing that is equivalent to the affirmation of that determined one been of things ‘ ‘. A normative consensus, forming in conditions of free and universal participation in the context of a practical speech, establishes a valid norm (or it confirms its validity). ‘ validade’ of a moral norm it means that ‘ merece’ the universal recognition in virtue of its capacity of, by means of the reason only, to get the assent of the will of those to who if dirige.’ ‘ (HABERMAS 2007, P. 65-66) Good i, what we have is the proposal of a side that points with respect to the fact that ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ of the other the moral judgment that does not have the same possibility, however would fit a clarification concerning this proposal here that in one of its aspects could be abrangncia of an experience given and crystallized in a result of what ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ that is, something that infects or makes possible a relation that would characterize as a citizen its circumstance, a dualidade that clama a unit, what he is or that where the proper proposal still points or the fact and, how much to the moral judgment, that does not point with respect to what it is, however only perhaps, for what it could be, that is, the presumption or still the estimated one and we have a difficult shock considered for Habermas, reason and will here and could ask what it characterizes the reason? Or still, the reason in its affirmation is will or construction on a foundation or a structure of will? Better it would be to place, what it would constitute the reason? Would be the proposal an intrinsic characteristic of the same one, that is, the reason? The reason in its constitution is not affirmed in proposals, as if it looks at for this, however when we arrive at the validity of something we are ahead of the quandary, affirmation and negation where in accordance with this, the reason, will subordinate or to the will not having become – a recognition that perhaps can say with this word, something that it was known and that necessary to pass again for the same process of knowing, that is, to recognize is to know two times so that if directs for what it could be characterized as the fact that constitutes what perhaps it gives cohesion to the assigned person as universal.