IJSP Number 5, 2023

104 side, the spirit and the whole world of the petit bourgeoise, meaning everything that is under the spell of “to have”, “to accumulate” or “to possess” – mentioned by E. Fromm in his Haben oder Sein [20]. As such, these films show that there is an open possibility, or at least the conditions for that possibility, to evolve and to make more out of life than is usually convenient or acceptable. From such an existential perspective, the person of today can be better than that of yesterday, and as for tomorrow, the same person will be even better, allowing oneself to progress and to grow continuously during life. As for the heroes of the above-mentioned films, life is an endless challenge but not one that should stop us in front of its problematic character, but rather drive us towards integrating those issues into a larger mental picture, one that finds them and us a place in the great circle of life. What’s important to remember here is that there is, in every human, enough place for growth – especially from a spiritual point of view but also from an intellectual or cultural or psychological one – and that such an evolution can and should be realized by living and embracing life in full action. It is not so much the case to analyse it or to understand what it means, or what destiny is or should be, or what the teleology of theology tells us. Also, it is not about bringing into consciousness every bit of our repressed unconscious or to study our behaviour under the microscope of science, tests or experiments. Life does not want to be moved into the intellect as another item among so many others that preoccupy our mind. Life actually wants to be lived, day after day – day-in, day-out – in the time and place fate ( fatum ) has put us. The historical time, geographical place, the social, political or economic context, as well as our own family structures, are not our choice – they are given by fatum . But, as G. Liiceanu mentions [21], fate is not to be confused with destiny. Fate is given to us or we fall into it without any power to change or to redraw something. On the other hand, destiny is something we choose (if we dare to do such a thing that is for the great majority, preposterous), freely and fully aware of what we want to do with our life. 6. CONCLUSION We still have a question, one that was very acutely raised by E. Fromm [22], namely, what kind of humans are needed in our neoliberal consumption-oriented society? Is it, on the one hand, the free, independent and autonomous person, one that has the freedom to make choices for his or her life, one that has his or her destiny in its own hands, or an apparently free person, superficially and formerly independent, but pliable enough to conform to impersonal and collective laws, to massification and instrumentalization, on the other hand? One possible direction of exploring these alternatives is suggested by Jordan Peterson in his introduction to 12 Rules for Life [23], where he stresses out that once you are placed “at the centre of Being”, you have no other choice than to actively involve yourself in your own life-course. As such, one is no more under the influence of the omnipresent imperatives of the collective, implicit or explicit, and, consequently, one can