Certainly to what I'd done and practiced all, I should conclude or summarize, but I cannot feel it so vital to me anytime, because I can have curiosity only consistently ongoing matter, not past, thus I cannot have mind to look back, nor look behind my back and already stepped footprint, just I want to look forward, only at following my interest personally and curiosity in analyzing all unsolved issues. 

Certainly explaining what I personally have done until now is either necessary. But I anytime have suspended that mission, because I anytime have a mind that at another place what I should address with would be existing. 

Very rigorously minute plan either I occasionally take, but if I'd done it than necessity, I suddenly would be tired and fed up with it, presumably, that anxiety anytime follows me. 

Exactly what starts obviously must have an end exactly, but what starts or be only staying or at stalemate doesn't end, so persistently, of course that recognition is not so fair, but needing only fairness does mean so much, doesn't it?

Strategically not having obvious starting must not be at least instant boom, in other words starting in gaining ground at booming must lose fame someday at some watershed.

Then we can have another strategy around starting and ending, or addressing and concluding.
At the matter of fact, my mind to create long roman as novel, but really my life itself as the same as any other person's it, its reality having somewhat, which is unexpressive by anybody, probably, formally summarizing one stiff claim or logics of course means so much, but at the same time, that trial is apt to provide us commonplace or just somewhat impresses us not so valuable cheaper reality stands still in lazy procedure, of course procedure means so much, but occasionally the stance not persistent in only taking steps only at procedure could be alowed to us, some kind of jumping, we are suggested with it, we could say.

Demolishing roman, demoniac logics, anarchy ethics, renegading theology, these things must be demanded at me, but probably it could never be only at me. That conviction must be here, there, anywhere.

Emmanuel Levinas thought every individually differentiation, hard gap we could never go beyond, that either means despair, it must mean our essence's emptiness, blank of meaning, because myself is consistently micro universe for anybody, how could reach our mutual understanding or solidarity?

If we persist in only fixed idea around our peace idea, justice, fairness, evenness, or so, when could we reach our the best conclusion? Otherwise, that kind of conclusuon, we could never need anymore, then we only can inspect each small thing so meticulously, so inductively. 

To some extent, anything should keep going on anarchily. 
But simultaneously everything should be operated and controled with sure reason. 

After all all things we must do would rely on only that balance or sometimes out of the blue plain destruction to it, not so regularly repititious, not making any bored circulation, not according to previously set orbit, but very carefully stepping forward in no wander, etc. eventually now I can declare is only so. 

Over our presumptive our objective goal set for the time being, we only can observe so temporary expedient somewhat urging us have mission feeling, but it is constantly substentially so unidentified to anybody, only that matter could be known to us all.
(to be continued)

(Oct. 15th. 2020)