Very profound thing and very easy thing are mutually back to back. Because very easy thing could be gotten only after acquiring so hard trained skill and learning, but that awareness could get some another difficulty around finding another so difficult thing in iterpretation.
In other words, learnt state could get discrimination around what could be familliar thing and not that thing, and to not that thing must tell us that another training must be necessary.

Finally, very familiar thing we'd regard could have another unidentifed unfamiliar element at that thing we regard as so well-known, that infinitely advancing antinomy, in other words, in knowing so well, we rather discover another yet inspected element.

Back to back relevance could be evidenced with that very demolishing but to some exent so enjoyably amusing thing must adjoin with very stiffly earnestly serious and offcial thing, on the other hand to very easily fun thing could be present and we can know that presence, on the contrary, so formally hard, and strictly sound and reliable thing which is not so fun but so essentially necessary thing could be present, though that presence must make amusing and fun thing for our pastime and entertainment items outstanding to us in daily life.

Though in world even among mutually seen so irrelevant things, we'd find out so mutually interacted essence so unexpectedly.

At the matter of fact, in human relation, we'd find so penetrating relevance back to back which could be found in very unexpected at a glance so seemed irrelevant things as combination.
E.g. very friendly human relation could be easily tone with so tiny mutual mind losing at taking attention and care around mutual understanding, then after all at any case, as long as carnally necessary human relation, anytime we should take care of mutual proper distance unless we face family members.

Though, either at political scene, very earnest conservative politician could switch the one's stance at diplomatic issue around bilateral or trilatetral relasionship or so, daringly trying to break usually taken impression by voters, by executing so harshly bold policy in switching, that trial could not be so exceptional at least at political stage in any country.
Course switching is one of their usual practice at least at political scene in any site in any country.

Not like these so really realizable example, e.g. any person must have dichotomy, but just anybody usually tries to hide that nature for protecting the one's social credibility.
And generally that thing could not be so easily shown to anybody, nevertheless, exceptionally at suffering from so dangerously critical situation to anybody, that usually not confirmable so unexpected another side could be mutually shown and awoken to each other, that case could not so rare, far from it, we must have so similar exprience at some specific occasion in life to us.

Eventually these so psychlogical exampling could not be done at philosophy circle, but either that sided analysis should not be ignored so legleclty, because without any inspection around our essential human nature presence, probably ontological view, metaphysical view could not be induced so well, at least to me, that thing could be seen so nrcessary.

Of course, at anytime not always mutually directly concerned nor interacted nor so relevant with each other, certainly anytime exceptional case must exist, nevertheless, to any case, we could never neglect so easily. Because regarding very exceptional case by itself could be derived from just our own igonorance or devoid of recognition, like that we should have introspective view either for pregressing our knowledge. 
(to be continued)

Feb. 23rd.   2022