David Hume certainly defines each notion and individually given own impression in some arbitrarily personal definition as somewhat he signifies notional union as associational ideas, but probably his those trials are not always successful at least at our own personal life in spite of his claiming content, this is my own interpretation. 

Because from the beginning, to us, notion is not so obviously discriminated in being impacted by many distracted specifically for these days reality, rather so noisy frequently converted any renewed innovative systematized order at any genre and any item, thus, necessarily, our mind discriminating function by itself can have own hesitant reaction around so busily convertible system reformation's continuous flood. 

From the beginning, in fact, our mind's apperance means so ambiguous, because if we try to define those phenomenal realities as truth, after all, extremely complicated informative flood made reality purplexes our own measurable mind so much in irritated judgement. 

Rather we need at another mind constantly another value e.g. very different typed more convenient and useful approach in terms of any daily practical approach to get anything.
Otherwise, our ancestors as the great philosophers must named that phenomenal thing "notion". 

Notion and mindfully impression are mutually never so easily discriminated nor actually mutually never so easily confirmed, because to us, to each own impressed mind or kind of perceptively given own image only given one in mind can have really sensed image, but any other one but each "myself" can never be aware of its own apperance, e.g. if we set for the present "love", to it, anybody can have each own sensed meaning and felt image, thus, fundamentally, to the "love", to You who are reading my this sentences, and me who writes this sentences now, in frank, mutually very differentiated perceptive impression, just accidentally, to each gapped it, we as you and I are using same modified content in expressing and confessing by you and me. 

And to mutually understandable accord by itself can never be proved as mutually identical with each other. Form the beginning, precisely and minutely mutual perceptive image apperance can never be evidenced, that own impossibility by itself must have been necessarily premised.

Though, after all, how we try to observe each mind to each other, what angle we personally apply could impact our own mind, and even if that approaching stance can be told to each other, after all, precisely mutually imminently done own appearance can never be mutually confirmed, because our own mind is fundamentally different from externally measurable object, in frank, mutually minutely confirming to each other is impossible. 
Thus, in conclusion, our each own applicable angle can be mutually confessed, but that image can never be told to each other as e.g. my mind picturing own image and your own it can be identical with or not can never be precisely evidenced consequently. 

Thus, consequently, e.g. only "notion" by itself can be applied as subjective item for evidencing. We won't have any correctly precise evidenced data by itself won't be outputted mutually, so consequently. 

After all, notion by itself is definitely our mind's own arbitrary picturing apperance thing which we only personally can be seen so clearly never shareable to any other one but us as each "me". Thus, the only personally given own regulatory apperance sign and indication by themselves are never so correctly or as mutually perfectly identified as the same as sociable picturing or not by itself can never be evidenced forevermore. 

After all, from the beginning, those own accord of the identical appearance perception given to our minds or not by itself can never be evidenced so correctly nor precisely. 

Additionally, impression we can have in our own immanent mind by itself can be constantly very merely emotionally as very interested or very uninteresting as not that so attracted or regarded so intergal or so must never be easily confirmed nor measured. 

Thus, perception by itself also can be impacted by those own personal mindset, so vastly and essentially so seriously and defiantly. 

Mutually, each interpretable idea's phenomenal conceived image or appearance are never so easily confirmed, only the impossible nature can be easily mutually understandable as obtained as mutually felt accord. 

In fact, our own accepting interpretable idea including perception accompanying concrete image can never be easily confirmed. That truth can be easily done on us. 

(Irregularly continued)

Feb. 24th.    2024