Progressively, such rightfulness, in a person’s viewpoint, may directly be conforming to how a person has acquired knowledge and what areas such person value the most. In this paper’s focus, this is made in order to present the nature of neutrality while integrating it with the areas of knowledge. As chosen, history and ethics may be two compelling yet interesting areas of knowledge, which neutrality may be useful.Describing the nature of neutrality can be very broad. In the aspect of a settlement or resolving vague cases, neutrality can be very useful. According to Trujillo, Bowland, Myers, Richards, and Roy (2008), the idea and the presence of neutrality can be the primary arbitration for a situational dilemma at present times. Observing such a statement, it can be understood that neutrality, at one of its core and basic purposes, is used to have an equitable or a fair-based comprehension of things during a situational analysis.According to Goldsmith (2000) in his letter discussed in his own article, addressed to Professor Wolpert, he stated that the regards of contemporary science will never be neutral as they are gathered objectively. In this statement made, however, this can be construed that the idea argues that the nature of neutrality, in a scientific point of view, may explicitly mean that it is structured unbiased and even-handed. Relating to the previous natural setting of neutrality in the aspect of the settlement, the scientific aspect now connects as they both extend to initiate neutral or fair concepts.As this paper progresses, neutrality can also be a cohesive concept to the areas of knowledge. Two of the compelling areas of knowledge, namely history, and ethics, are both integrated into the nature of neutrality and its various forms. However, it may be difficult also to integrate neutrality to the two given areas of knowledge without taking into account their natures, as well.