Two questions.

Is pay walled content allowed here?

Also, is it fair to accept a philosophical idea would have absolutely zero relevance or persuasiveness* for portions of the population? Say it's an idea likely catalysed by a biological urge which is then interpreted at, say, a figure who is then philosophised about?

If so, for this idea to work you would need to be biologically similar (half the population, plus or minus 4 to 15%), but also you would need to have those similar figures in your life. With fewer and fewer of these factors, the idea catalysed by these life experiences would have less effect.

Finally, could an idea become better* if it weren't so clearly personal?