Rose considered the following example of this sort: ' ' … imagines a revolutionary whom it intends to knock down a regimen consisting of an aristocracy and that it wants to bring equality, a government of all. This revolutionary would conceive in the subjective reality, its conscience, a relation way-ends, I go to knock down the current government through the revolution (half) and to bring the freedom and the government of all (ends). Meanwhile, in the objective reality, the ends are logically associates to the ways, making the revolution (half); they knock down the government, however, they do not bring the government of all and yes a dictatorship or a new aristocracy (ends). Therefore, the two realities, in such a way objective how much subjective, it has logic.
What it makes of this algica action? It is the simple fact of the end logical of the subjective reality not to coincide with the end of the objective reality. The government of all and the government of new aristocracia' '. (PINK, 2005) Pareto if interests mainly for two sorts of not logical actions: as and the room sort. As if it relates to the ritual and symbolic acts, that do not possess an objective end, but yes a subjective purpose. In the room sort if they fit the resultant actions of scientific errors. ' ' The employed way produces one effective result in the plan of the reality, and was related with the ends in the conscience of the actor, but what it happens it does not reflect what it would have to occur, of conformity with the hopes or forecasts of the citizen that acts. The error takes the not-agreement of the objective relation and the relation subjetiva.' ' (ARON, 1982). In accordance with Pareto, the truth on the actions human beings only can be found in the biological conception of the man, and in the theories or ideas that this possesss or same it does not formulate to explain its action.