Whoever has carefully read our title will undoubtedly evoke that of that masterpiece of Philosophy that is Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit. We do not mean that Hegel neglects the "we", but rather that in some sense he "deduces" it in experience, or supposes it as the phenomenological "we", which knows the necessary logic of the whole project, which is "science of the experience of consciousness. For Hegel, the "we" is not the starting point, but appears in the unfolding of theoretical consciousness (as self-understanding) as self-consciousness, to finally know itself to be reason, which manifests itself as the historical realization of that reason, which Hegel calls "spirit", in the immediate substantiality of ethics. The problem lies in the arbitrary universalization of the self that language produces at the very beginning of the phenomenological itinerary as presented by Hegel. Faced with this secondary character of the experience of us, we oppose in the present work, as immediate and irreducible, the ethical-mythical experience, which occurs as us. And then the question arises about the unfolding of this experience. People is, then, the first form of wisdom. That is to say, the first way of defining a communal, ethical-mythical relationship, with that from which one comes, simply because one "is". And the origin is, for a people, from the earth, and not from nature, as is the case with conscience-science. And the opposition seemed fruitful to us: to the science of the experience of the conscience we would face a wisdom of the experience of the peoples. In reality, it was about seeing what was happening thinking from us and not from the self, being on earth and not being confronted with nature.