Contemporary society is an era in which communication means are unusually increasing their market share. Therefore, all awareness of problems, individuality, and the way organizations and groups should be have changed significantly. In other words, freedom of communication and increased opportunities to express opinions are creating new problems. On the one hand, it’s a privacy issue, a rights issue, and a crime deterrence issue.

That phenomenal social change in several decades must have another change’s generation, that is global uniformity in having idea is spreading, that trend could convert usage of language’s own nature’s deletion. But probably it could be so temporary or instantly usage in socially ordinary transitive sites or so. Though if we have more precise conversation together, that formalized and officially dutiful attitude could be peeled gradually.

These mutual occasional gap makes us as any global individual citizen some cunning wisdom. One is not having straightforward intentional confession, another is having desire to do so at differentiated occasion in public space, in this regard, contemporary society’s nature is personally optional chance making for each other.
Multiple discernement for showing intention personally and publicly is one of very typical any citizen’s mentally ordinary mode.

By the way, these psycologial issue is anytime positioned or kind of interpreted against phylosophy, logics, ethics or so in having own idea.
Because socially publicly showing appearance is kind of age trend, and socially phenomenally forcible necessity.
In other words, these to some extent, superficial mind and manner issue is different from more metaphysical ideas or so for our brain’s comprehension and really practical socially applicable contents.

Just the other day, I’ve finally finished reading the Japanese translation of Paul Ricoeur’s text(original is in French), which I’ve read over a few months or more for nearly half a year. I’m thinking of getting the original book, but it’s difficult to read this kind of text, whether it’s philosophy or theology. Candid scholarship is not so easy. But that’s why it’s worth it. Rather, it’s all about to start.

Levinas’s “From Existence to Existing One” has been read down for more than a few months, and finally it will be finished in more than 20 pages, but Levinas is also a rather esoteric philosopher. Also, Martin Luther’s translation, which I have been reading for several years, has been read a little, but it is quite difficult and the problem itself is deep. Academics should be spent a lifetime.

Karl Barth I have bought quite a lot of books and have read some, but rather it is easier to understand for Levinas and Luther (which is natural because he is a long time ago). It can be said that it is an easy-to-understand index description. Barth’s ethics is too pure and beautiful. It is close to the true transmission of God’s Word.

In other words, to these metaphysical and theological terms or kind of intellectual activities with interpretation and consideration means so another dimensional our brain activity, toward specifically daily work, citizen life’s habitual manner or so for us.
Nevertheless, these things and daily ordinarily taken our necessity and usage of communication is not divided so perfectly at two diffrentiated dimensional grasp, never yet, at our own mind’s subconscious discriminative mind, both things must have joint and mutually contacted cross section.

Just we are taking method to communicate with each other at having daily greeting act or making manner and individually considerably meditative and contemplative ideas and training around our future demanded scheme and mindset for heading for own job and creating human relation. Consequently all these could derived from our mind’s intending modus ponens between publicity or kind of publicly taken correctness including moralistic regulation, on the other hand, we can take even the same words, cocepts, or ideas, in terms of more individually personal demand dragging idea and own spiritual mindset of pictruing mind for our own future.
These two very mutually distinctive thinking circuits are certainly thought through the same language and that concept, nevertheless, our mind’s accepting mode and tendency are certianly remoted and essentially each differently intended and exactly different direction is done at our mind and brain.

What does that mean to us?

Just we usually discriminate each usage’s object, but from the beginning, otherwise essentially we as one human of mind attending presence are never divided between very socially ceremonial or kind of very formalized obligatory attitude, or showing appearance and true mind or our deepened impressed, or implanted educated instruction or kind of implanted manner obligatroy mind or so, so completely in obvious gap. If we could be defined or interpreted at that perfect gapped presence, we’d be some mentally pathologically split personality ordered state presence.

We all are unified presence at both publicly and privately.

Because communication platform must be created by our very personal mind with mentality, emotion, desirable necessity or so, nevertheless, that inclined nature must never be only selfishly arbitrary nor egoistically discretionary.
There, we absolutely need some trustworthy criterion for comprehending our mind’s identity at discerning publicity and privacy.

First, mentality or spirituality and words concept and generally regulatory used and applied practical dimensional recognition are mutually very interracted and jointed in some credible bond and trust.
Meanwhile, our mind attending another very instinctive idea or physiolosically demanding true mind with bodily memorized item, or savagely noticeable mind to own life’s future aspect concerned with our own mortality are certainly indwelling in our brain, knowledge and usually attending mindset.

Latter described items could be interpreted as personally held privacy or so.
And substantially, any ethologically questionable item is deeply relevant with these. Necessarily philosophical ideas and ideology must have the same essential intention to these.
On these basic stances, mentality and usually held spiritually notional ideas, intuitively generating kind of suggestive ideas or so could be configurated at our common sense abiding cognition.

If thoese ideas could be one of basic human personal mind’s ground, on these basises, calculatively carnally practical ideas, knowledge and life spending strategical ideas and mind could be composed.

Nevertheless, meantime, these very basic ideas, notions, skills or so could be resisted by our another mind, what does that mean?
That could be very emergently demanded our more instantly realizable physical acting or so, and that is just so savagely regarded kind of very quick response and at the moment instantly smart reaction is needed, and the very externally accidentally happening things could need more calculating mind, and emergency reacting typed athletic and physical rained skill or so could be advantage, and useful for evading serious damage to us, personally.That necessity must be very psychologic wisdom and our knowledgeable ideas or so.

However, additionally, that thing is not only nature disaster, labor it, or so with anything accidentally could happen but also e.g. very rarely coming human life’s so integral encounter to benefactor, lover, or any kind of human life signified very grave somewhat must be included. Then, that very exceptional cases must need another more penetrating thing to us.

What might have been it? Otherwise, more straightly what does that mean to our private life, so personally?
Is that only mentally reactive somewhat? Necessarily theological or phylosophical mind must be applied afterward we’d met those, but that introspective idea and contemplation are obviously another dimensional minds, more directly and straightly facing our actual site dependent idea or analyzable somewhat is definitely needed to us, why not?
How can you feel or have some specific impression or detachment around this?
At next occasion for debating, the last question’s suppositional solution must be done in this context.

(to be continued)

Jan. 15th. 2022