Ultimately, we need constantly arbitrary stance and aim, not ultimate them. In other words, the option in symmetry between absolute and relative is yet effective, because that measurement must be at these days already seen fanatic. Fanatism means correctness abiding attitude. And that drags us into only aim establishing behavior. However, that stance is anytime aim's prosecution preceded mind.

Rather we should apply transcendent ideological stance, because that stance rather makes us have some relaxed optimistic attitude. Transcendental it could be too ambitious mind, but at least transcendent attitude must be easily excusable to our occasionally gotten own mistake or kind of generous mind to our own incomplete nature.

The most important our mindset is to us having cheering spirit to our own nature.

Because unnecessarily driving our mind into no-exit critically overshadowing emergency is the least productive our mind.

We merely demand us the presence to head for the future not so pessimistically and not at crippled minded. If we'd survive it, we'd almost solve half the most difficult problem.

By the way, if our global community could have obviously divided order to two polarities, we'd never smartly survive our own difficultly. 

And just our own difficulty is making our stance ultimate radically. And unexpectedly radicalism is similar with Sentimentalism. Because Radicalism is derived from extremely rejection to Sentimentalism.

Nevertheless, Neutralism is not specified identified object. Because being neutral means only incompletely in-between.

This time, particularly definitive approach is tried. But substantially unexpectedly we all are unnecessarily trapped by irrational fanaticism of being not neatly defined spiritualism. Though we once should revise our own trapped carelessness.

Next occasion, I address to our daily practical notice demanding case with concrete examples.

(Irregularly continued)

Apr. 22nd.  2023