Page 90 [90]
the opposite possibility, even though there is no good without evil,
no health without disease (see Heraclitus). In the same way, there
is no light without darkness.
On the other hand, it is as though the idea of brotherhood really
does seem to “fall to the side.” Of the three “big ones,” freedom still
remains to be discussed, but its interpretation, as we have seen, is
more than problematic. It is ideal and unrealistic. It is impossible
at this point to analyze it in more detail. It is enough to note that
freedom is different for the individual and for the community, and
also that we cannot disregard the relationship between freedom
and necessity, although let us add: Hegel thinks differently, and
the existentialist Sartre has still another perspective.
Let us look at the concepts used throughout history to describe the
“other” and the “alien”. The original meaning of the terms and the
transformation they have undergone over time reveal much. The
Greeks used the term Eévoc (xenos) for both other and alien, mean¬
ing both stranger and guest. But they also used the term &yvwotos
(agnothos), which means “unknown to the community” and has a
much milder overtone. However, there is another term, Gevodoéia
(xenodochia), which means hospitality, a friendly welcome. The
Eevodoxeiov is the place where the stranger is looked after, in the
Middle Ages the place where pilgrims were looked after (hospitale
pietatis), in Hungarian it is the "ispotály". The &évos, then, becomes
(can become) a stranger’s welcome friend if we have knowledge of
him. The unknown is suspicious and remains a stranger. One who
may be hated (dößog) or feared.
If we look at Latin, there are also several terms for a stranger,
such as hospes, which means alien, newcomer, but can also mean
invited. The “other” isthe alienus, and the barbarus isthe “alien” as
enemy, whose culture is different (= uncultured), while the exoticus
suggests an attentiveness mixed with curiosity, which typified the