Even if somebody could see that doing everything so freely, in so honest credible credo, to any rule, that rule's identity could be so ambiguous, not so clear criterion could not be found to anybody, afer all anybody could be involved with some unidentified distress at questing what behavior we should apply so personally and simultaneously publicly.

Necessarily meantime. we all are aware of that questioning everything could smother our all daily breathing in and out and we'd be on complete deadlock so mentally and spiritually.

Anyway, at very smooth and pleasant running on everything, otherwise at very annoyably hindered troublesome situation, no matter where we are going to head for, eventually we must be obsessed with some sincere questing where we could find truly correct answer.

And very necessarily inductively we'd conclude that otherwise, nobody could not be so freely doing anything, to some extent only that simply detached or invincible ignorance must be identified at that sincere questioning.

Though. subseuently we'd get the conclusion that nobody could not be freely doing anything, otherwise, trying to do anything so smartly pleasantly, never yet only invisible hinge could be consciously sensitive at our own mind, that state could be more serious, if we'd get it so serious, unnecessarily, just we instinctively try to evade all these sincere qquestioning and try to turn our eyes away from looking everything in the face.

Necessarily we usually wisely dodge that serious gaze to anything and instinctively prevent us from having so tough distress in mind.

In other words, only plainly taking for granted that all things should be dealt with expediently and only appropriately trying to make ends meet could satisfies our expedient aim and object, and that behavior could never be denied nor criticized so ciritically.
Nevertheless, somewhat indigested mind could be left to us as an idea, or kind of formalized notion in some dissatisfied mind.

We could identify that indigested mind could be some our honestly indwelling conscioence and religiously honest creed or so.
With these mind's necessarily keeping thoughts or so could invite another one questioning to our own mind, that must be "If we are only accustomed with being satisfied with anything, how should we assess our presence, because it could be after all so convincing truth either tthat we are exactly incompleted pesence, but just because of its fact and our known reality, we should ask us personally so stark "How we should admit only obediently doing everything and only controlling our desirable everything in terms of carnality or so?", that contrarily heading questing mind necessarily generates in our idea.
We know that any resisting spiritual idea could be appropriate or not in questioning thing in mind and daily act could not be so worthless nor so, that mind could come up to our consciousness.

These cud of questining's necessity must be made at our another idea, that kind of presence in us could cause our essential questioning mind to us, really in daily life.
That must be not having any question and only obeying alreadly custommary and conventionally human's history, culture, religious belief could have already set previously when we try to do something, and each scheduled oyr social task dealing as harder as working ants, these reality is necessarily to us very correctly done task or mission, nevertheless, at least in our own mind, everything could be allowed to get skeptic assessed occasion, that mind could come up to our daily empty time or so.

Becaise, meantime, our mind anytime holds some another idea that we are never robot, we are different from only schemed nor only set-up working robot nor so.
Necessarily, here I try to claim is never like social activists or so could do.

This questioning intention or intrinsic signification is not social citizenship right nor socially demanded justice's issue or problems.
In other words, the kind of question must mean more theologically otherwise ethically signified somewhat so invincible questioning, necessarily that could take our own death into account in qustioning, previously.
After all it's not about the right to insist on a review of the salary system.

If we try to focus on that questioning's definition, it's not about the right to insist on a review of the salary system. Absoletely not that thing, then eventually we are never not only ideologically alive, nor not only politically survive nor not only romantically enjoying the time in amusement or so, neither nor we are never spending each day, only for getting tired never yet come near having a desire realized, neither with the minds accumlated into come near having to commit a suicide so mentally.

Of course, aging so much gives anyone not surrounded only by hope nor wishing, otherwise perfectly satisfied happness nor so.

Probably we'd already detached from that easily dragged emotion nor so, because we'd learnt everything in half completion and half incompletion.
In other words, anytime we all are partially satisfied at something and constantly only small realized things could ease our exhausted mind too.
Never satisfied so enough nor perfectly gotten ecstacy, we are surrounded.

At least about me, I don't live only for keeping and swearing social justice, nor necessarily only getting momentary rejoice, these are either so partial.
After all Im netiehr perfectly honest nor correct, nececcarily neither dishonest nor incorrect.
Only that interpreting content could be outputted to my life.

Then, are we alive only for believing etnernity to it?
Probably anybody could answer, "That is partially extreme definition, nevertheless, we could never deny it so completely and plainly, nevertheless we must never be completely neutral presence, neither.

Just only next truth could be provided necessarily, that anybody don't want the one just meek sheep in strictly managed herd by society, nevertheless, anybody could never survive our society in which any of our social responsibility nor so could be neglected.
And this is so integral, nevertheless we are neither the absolutely fair nor even neutrally intended nor universally coverable middle road oriented presence.

Yes, surely we are so nasty presence to handle nor to be handled, only that sigh could be heard to anybody's immanent mind, you see!

Oct. 9th., Oct 11th., Nov. 7th.,   2021

Memorandum; The kind of propositional questioning must be hard problem, thus for the present I’ll abstain from making this proposition series’ theme, but if I’d deepen the questioning, another occasion, very irregularly I’d provide you all readers of my sentences, you know!