If we simply define or signify daringly ∀ and ∃, we can regulate like next.

∀ means introspectively logically thought afterward intuitively totalized idea could be done to us in mind, then ∃necessarily means transcendently metaphisically thought to all these spatially and serially embodied being's state, then ∀ apposteriori, as inductive then very cooler assessing and judging, meanwhile, ∃ means with these ∀'s totalized empirical cognition, then our capably known at a strech, then this means both deductive but very consequently acquiring cognition, then it must be very infinitely making cyclic but at consistently fixed somewhat.

By the way, 

¬(A, ¬A)

means from the beginning, also consequently indicating A is at nonesense, in other words, it just do never be at relevant with A. Then, this denial signified degree is not strength, but with neglection, then necessarily it is equal to filliping or repelling, then not passionate, denial as trial means passion, but this means never so, then very apathitic dealing to proposition.

Then more so loosened it must be 

 ¬(A ∨ ¬ A)

Thereby, principly next definitive formula could be composed, in terms of focusing aspect,

¬(A ∨ ¬ A) must be weakened so much than ¬(A, ¬A), then its denial strength as degree of danying passion must get it weakened. Then necessarily in terms of factual discriptive passion not in terms of action, it as ¬(A ∨ ¬ A) rather so stronger than ¬(A, ¬A),
then necessarily if we take an account of focusing degree, 

¬(A, ¬A) > ¬(A ∨ ¬ A)  

Meanwhile, if we take an account of set as mathematical term signified modus ponens, 

¬(A, ¬A)⊃ ¬(A ∨ ¬ A)

However, these two recognitions are mutually very diffrentiated dimensional grasp.

Then, for formulating its issue so definitely, we necessarily need another rationalized symbol, sign or mark must be necessary. Otherwise, with assembry or assemblying each conceptual mark or so, we could discover another formula at this process, I could presume so far.

(to be continued)

Mar. 9th. 2021