Answer: On the one side we have the free personality: by definition, the free personality is not sensitive nor obsessive, this is because it can somewhat be described as nonchalant. Its desires are transparent, for they are just what institutional approval keeps in the forefront of consciousness. Another institutional pattern would alter their number and intensity; A greater part of it is artificial, reducible or harmless. But on the other side, the social bond itself is nothing but the mutual reflection of these self-secure integrities. Recall the definition of love. Is not this the very picture of a small academic? Where is there a place in this hall of mirrors for either personality or fraternity?
Explanation: When you go through the revised version of the passage, you will notice that it has been simplified, Making it easier to understand.
On the one side we have the free personality: by definition it is not neurotic, as it does not have problems or dreams. Its desires are clear, fas they only represent what society tries to put in the minds of people; any other system would change their number and intensity. There is not much in them that is natural, that cannot be eliminated, or that is culturally dangerous. But on the other side, the social bond itself is only the understanding of such integrities. Think of the definition of love. Does it not remind you of the small academic? Where is there a place in this hall of mirrors for either personality or fraternity?
