Abstract
Pavel Kabát's contribution must be understood as the first confrontation of a social philosopher trained on Hegel with phenomenology in general and Hans Rainer Sepp's phenomenological oikology in particular. What appears in Kabát's first reading experience of oikology as a "naive" critique or as an unbiased questioning of it, quickly turns out to be just that fundamental problematic between the bulk of social philosophy after Hegel and phenomenology, which is due to certain diametrical starting points of both philosophical currents and which is neither new nor solveable.
Kabát decisively poses the metaphysical as well as social-theoretical question of the beginning and thus of the relationship between part and whole. Primarily, he aims at the consideration whether the "In1" (i.e., the in-dividual before or apart from the influence of society, etc.), as Sepp seems to understand it, is really possible and conceivable, and whether it, the individual, must not rather be understood as the product of "In2" (the external, social influences).
At the same time, however, Kabát strongly sympathizes with Sepp's concept of the individual, which becomes clear in the second main section of the essay, where he uses the latter's oicology to address the relationship between self-realization and work.