DesCartes concluded that even we have an idea around us, what we can doubt its presence as our its idea evidences our certain consciousness, and if it should be so right and even the world must be an illusion, and seen myself is abother thing as the different thing I believe in, but ultimately only my doubting mind must never be wiped, he thought so.
For him, that completion must be necessary, coz he had an idea that if we human was really certain presence, its thing must be independent from Lord's gift to us, for him, once completely making human presence independent from Lord.

Meanwhile, now contemporary society in circle of researching around consciousness, rather consistently unconciousness precedes any conscious function, never yet contemporary brain nervous physiology has an idea that unconciousness draws our consciousness , as its proof, we see dreams when we sleep, and when we wake up at early morning, we don't use our consciouness for wakeup, rather we physiolosically first are driven to be awoken from sleeping to be conscious around anything for our own acts.

By the way, ordinarily believing means having certain idea in no having doubt around unseen thing, unconfirmed identity as well as substance, in other words, believing depends on what even is never seen thing, but simultaneously it could be thought to be present never accompanying any doubt about it, in believing in its presence, even its thing could never evidenced in measuring nor data showing, e.g. love degree, Lord's affection or so, these things are never materialistic substance as well as our mind, in other words, we usually, with its believed mind, try to measure all confirmed everything with length, width, angle, scaled everything, these are just physical things, toward them, all things with mind, emotion, ideas,  or so with loving depth are all so mentally metaphysical items.

Of course, we can at a degree confirm all things with reference to our showing own expression or acting tendency, but these are neither substant evidential things, only spiritually immanently we are tangible. 

Unconsciouness has strong power to be noticed to any tangibly confirmed things, but simultaneously it mobilizes our mind, then we can perceive everything, Merleau Ponty interpreted it as body, but simultaneously we can find its function through our credibility to our mind so consciously, in other words, interpreting and analyzing unconsciuousness substance is ourconsciousness.

 In terms of synthecized view, consciousness is mobilized and functioned by unconsciousness, but synchronically unconsciousness can be evidenced with our conscious idea, that kind of feedback function, we can confirm.

Skepticism or sarcasm must rely on our consciousness, if we can immanently confirm identity of God or so by consciouslly, but if we interpret or explain and discribe its emprical content we must need consciously reason. That murually reliable relevance must be identified with any angled view for solution toward enigma around our mind, or so.

From the beginning any formulation means explanatory wisdom, it must be adopted to any our mind reaction. Of course, what drives us need to reasonable principle must be intuitive awaking and it must rely on unconsciousness, rather we probably could say that what mobilizes formulative functional mechanism and substantially mobilized and making an effort of founding and composing theory have mutually interfaced function and relevance and with it we can switch anytime accoding to necessary alternative, we rather should regard our mind as we are.（to be continued )
(May. 29 th. 2020)