To be frank, or to say, in general, in fact, very generous idea should be treated so precious, and in one identified individual, very complicated plural personality could be present, and to that thing, we necessarily should not take or regard the split personality or so in terms of pathological view, as possibly kind of one prejudiced idea could be attended to anyone so obligedly, though necessarily, we need a view to one person's mind, idea, ideology or so as from the beginning so contradictory nature being.

Unless one person's own biassed sensitivity or so could harm or infringe so vital social stability or commonsense inclined kind of ordinary order, we should be generous at assessing any idea or sensitivity holding one in society.

Though, in the term of religious belief's option, either to it, unless the one's idea could drag extreme disadvantage to society itself or any other general citizen's peace and security, no matter kind of religious creed, if the one has, we should aknowledge the one's optional freedom as citizen's right.

In other words, we are apt to accept only logically reasonable theory or personal claim, occasionally not logically reasonable or kind of somewhat inconsistent sensation or personal option should be generous not at prohibiting them, unless these things could jeopadise any kind of our own peaceful condtion.
Because ordinarily seen so convincing ideas or so either could be regarded as the object we should review, or redress our own adhered prejudiced idea around commonsense.
Thereby, consequently, even not so originally very not orthodox nor not so classically thought herecy or so should be taken that mind's object whihch should be re-checked or analyzed that true substance or essential meaning to now us.

Namely, we should not narrow our own idea around acceptance to another idea or so in social commonsense. 

By the way, very ordinarily seen objective scientific ideas and very another notion to it as religious very fictionally supposed kind of myth, holy script should not be swept away from our reasonable judgement around personal optional idea or social action.

Because our human mind must never be controlled only with cooled reasonable logical nor scientifc idea, but also with so traditionally regarded ethnic or cultural ideas or so. And that fact is equivalent with that we are all partially controlled by both of them, thereby we should not fix any domain's idea at making anything leant on only rationally convincing nor only scientifically persuasive idea. In other words, unless it could be harmful dellusion or kind of fantasm or so, we should accept any subjective idea with even unscientific credo or so, unless it could violate any social order with other citizen's privacy or so.

Because originally we all are very naturally and necessarily so unscientific mind holders and very subjectively secured with kind of irrational idea or instructive lesson, teaching or mindset, everything is unless it'd be anti-socially violent nor disorderly to any still life, we should allow or permit anybody's own idea as the thing in freedom's permissive zone, so socially with general commonsense.
With these mindsets, we'd surpass any ethnically, nationally gapped emotion and mutual unnecessary missunderstanding to each other.

Actually, we all are unexceptionally very personally dellusive idea holders in internal mind, that'd be derived from our ancestors' savage life sustainable instinctive intuition at discerning fellow, ally or dangerous one, enemy or so, nevertheless unless its thing could plunder any other one's mind, and really embodied life, we are necessarily allowed at holding any idea, at least in the domain completely indivudually forvorable contents.
 
With these things including even prejudiced pesonal favor or so, we simultaneously get us awoken to the ideology and social justice in knowing any other one's unique unhabitual idea or thought to ours.
With these reality's modus ponens as premise of personality, on the contrary the social evenness, fairness, and public view in justice's regard could be attended and equipped at our own mind, both noticeably or unnoticeably.

Thus, really we all unconsiously have publicly seen so correct and appropriate idea and mutually necessary publicly seen correct and rationally convincing trutsworthy social stance and justice we humanically absolutely need in mind to each other.
In other words, we should separate and resonably divide own subjectivity and publicly regarded social attitude, manner and courtesy.

Necessarily that saying so is easy to anybody to show off publicly in utterance, as manifesting, but actually practicing is hardly completed, concreted so smartly well, than we can imagine or picture our future's appearance with ideally regarded wishing mind.
Nevertheless, we should not abandon nor forsake that kind of ideally mutual co-existence to any other very differentiated ideal, idea, ideology holding ones, because nowadays specifically we are at very nervously endangered own life security besieging days with nature disastor, COVID new typed mutation's devestation and public order's violation, and we ought to have common ethics to collaborate with these solution neglecting each own mindset or kind of personally identified things with history, ethnicity, natitonality, religeous creed or so.

In other words, any beautiful view we can share consists in mutuall effort at excluding any unnecessary prejudiced ideas, and minds in one individual personality.
(to be continued)

Dec. 12th.      2021

Memorandum; The next occasion to debate this theme, we should assess to our mind's very twisted and originally contradictory components attending reality and its reason, and analysis in looking for effective solution for making ends meet at keeping our mind and idea's constancy.