Ockham also judges unfounded this position. It does not have nothing in the writing that can make to think about a direct intervention of God when a community of men chooses or delegates a person to exert the command (cf. GHISALBERTI, 1997, P. 286-287). For such Ockham shock of the disgnostic following o: such human power to constitute authority itself exactly was explicitou when the necessity appeared of the authority, that is, when the institution of the civil power showed to be the only possible way to guarantee the development pacific and commanded of the convivncia human being (GUISALBERTI, 1997, P. 287). Resumidamente what Ockham wants to say is that the man competes at the rate of the duty of dividuar the convenience to institute the authority, but was God who gave to the man the reason to look the things necessary and useful to live in commanded and pacific way.
In last analysis, it will have to be said that institution of the authority as the one of the private property, while determined for the reason, drift of God, but only in indirect way (GHISALBERTI, 1997, P. 287). the proper Ockham leaves to be transparent in ‘ ‘ Dialogus’ ‘ that the creation of an authority would not be indispensable that regulated the development pacific and commanded of the convivncia human being, when such convivncia happened between people dominated for the reason and not for the passions. In fact, the nature creates all the equal men. Nobody can be boasted of, for proper initiative, to have to be able on a fellow creature. Moreover, we see that the main duty of who is constituted as authority is of refrear and punishing the evildoers, what it brings as consequence that in a community of perfect men the authority is superfluous.