From the beginning, we have not plain universality. Its notion could be made with despair caused from so unreasonable experience and introspection around it, we arbitrarily have or are obliged to provide us, thus, consequently, what is goodness and what is wickedness as questioning by itself, so arbitrarily to each group, as race, ethnicity, and pedigree or so, at contemporary society, each profession.

What is goodness and wickedness, its questioning must rely on each specific historical background and it dragging moral and commonsense. Then eventually, any universal ethical value and its criteria or so must be expediently thought makeshift device, however, that average deal must be found at each occasion.

Consequently, we have only the kind of concessional method at any case. That judgment could be applicable either to now Gaza strip hard battle and Myammer’s internal screwed-up.

However any kind of average ideas guiding scheme could be seen not so convincing to any group, eventually everything could be back to first question. Ultimately, only our physiological nature, psychological nature, or syntaxes dragging our thinking modus ponens or so could be left to us.

Political commonsense and financing scheme or so are neither exceptional to us. Therefore, universality must be interpreted so only abstract idea or ideology, then originarily what do idea or ideology mean to us? Only the question must come up to our mind.

(to be continued)

May. 13th. 2021