It seemed that the situation could be clearly accepted by people, a mutual understanding that stemmed from one's internal view of the issue—a very simple and straightforward preliminary thought. A satisfactory analysis that could later be clearly accepted by people almost perfectly encapsulated this understanding.
Why, then, complicate matters with a further exploration into other aspects of the issue that people might not accept?
This was simply one's own thoughts on the matter.
It almost appeared that these mutual thoughts were entirely the same reasonable approach to the issue.
The mutual understanding, thus, became unnecessary for any further unique exploration into the issue.
What remained was a situation that people needed to approach in what seemed like a valuable manner—explaining or expounding was necessary.
This so-called ideal approach to the issue, along with merely stemming from one's own internal thoughts on the issue, hence sharing the same thoughts.