Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
More political philosophy about how to manage complexity and more..
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Amine Moulay Ramdane
Dec 25, 2020, 2:31:52 PM12/25/20
to
Hello..
More political philosophy about how to manage complexity and more..
In software engineering you can by good code refactoring manage efficiently "complexity", since potential advantages of code refactoring may include improved code readability and reduced complexity; these can improve the source code's maintainability and create a simpler, cleaner, or more expressive internal architecture or object model to improve extensibility.
But to know more about how to manage complexity, i invite you to read
the following very interesting article:
Learning to Live with Complexity
https://hbr.org/2011/09/learning-to-live-with-complexity
Now more political philosophy about specialization and survival..
Look at the following video of DINOSAURS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIX_Pr9ufR8
So what are you noticing ?
So if you are smart you will quickly notice that DINOSAURS
have not survived since they were too specialized ! so now
you are understanding one of the most important rule in political
philosophy and it is that you have to know that being good at adaptability is also knowing how to not be too specialized !
I give you a quick example:
Today you have to know how to diversify economy so that to be good at adaptability, and this diversification is also not being too specialized ! (read below my thoughts about Colombia that wanted and is
wanting to diversify its economy so that to be much more
efficient and much better at adaptability)
I give you another example about being too specialized:
Also lack of decentralization is also being too specialized,
this is why i said about nationalism the following:
I think that nationalism is also like too much "centralization", since this too much centralization of nationalism is like a too much monopolize that also hurts quality, and also i think nationalism is too much competition that lacks collaboration and this causes that it hurts quality too, but you have to also understand that the tendency of our today world is to decentralize for better efficiency, not to become nationalism, read my following thoughts to notice:
Yet more political philosophy about decentralization..
We can say the following:
The classical notion of decentralization does not necessarily imply democracy, and an organization may be decentralized without being based on democratic principles.
But i ask a smart question of:
Can we say that an organization based on democratic principles may be centralized ?
Here is my answer:
But we can notice that even though decentralization doesn't
necessarily imply Democracy, Democracy is a "kind" of decentralization,
and this kind of decentralization brings efficiency because we can
notice that Democracy needs requirements such as competitive elections and free press, and i think that Democracy is more efficient than
Dictatorship at fighting corruption(and corruption can mean lack of efficiency), read my following thoughts about Democracy and more to understand:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/Nudyb_4QCRU
But notice in my above link that i am saying that we have to seek like a balance between competition and collaboration, and i think that it is
this new more efficient model of seeking like a balance between competition and collaboration that is the "cause" of bringing decentralization that brings efficiency, and i think that the tendency of our today world is to seek a balance between competition and collaboration.
I give you another example of being too specialized:
So in "philosophy" we have to ask such the following very important question that is:
Is working in a higher level of abstraction better
than working on a lower level abstraction?
I think that civilization has gone and is going forward towards the future by needing from us to also be "specialization", so i think that both the working at the high level of abstraction and at low level
of abstraction are specializations, we can easily notice
it by noticing that software engineering works at a higher
level of abstraction, and i think it is like a specialization, so i think that computer science is much appropriate way
of understanding, since computer science works both at a higher level of abstraction and at the lower level of abstraction , because computer science understand the how it is made and how to build it to a higher level of abstraction, so computer science is both working at a higher level of abstraction and working at a lower level of abstraction, so it "generalizes" better and it is better for adaptability.
Read more in all my following thoughts to understand better:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/XgEvO1E9kIU
More political philosophy about the smart game that we call human life..
Look at the following video from Colombia:
Colombia's booming tech scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxPySfuQO_c
So as you are noticing that the spirit of the Colombian person
that is speaking in the above video is positive(he is positive like me), so as you are noticing that he is playing at the game of human life
that is also to diversify the economy, and he is giving a great
importance to tech industry and he is giving a great importance to
economic integration with other countries, so as you are
noticing it is part of the Global optimization since we have to
be this optimization so that to become efficient worldwide,
so i think that we have to be optimistic since i think that
with the exponential progress of our humanity we will become
much much more efficient in the near future of 2030.
Tech giants' anticompetitive practices investigation - US lawmakers report their findings
"In recent years, each company has expanded and exploited their power of the marketplace in anticompetitive ways."
"Our investigation leaves no doubt that there is a clear and compelling need for Congress and the antitrust enforcement agencies to take action that restores competition, improves innovation, and safeguards our democracy."
Read more here:
https://www.computing.co.uk/news/4021278/tech-giants-anticompetitive-practices-investigation-us-lawmakers-report-findings
EU targets big tech with tighter target list and rules
I have just read the following article, i invite you to read it:
Large platforms are invasive, they pay little tax and they destroy competition. This is not the Internet that we wanted, ”said another source with direct knowledge of Brussels plans.
EU targets big tech with tighter target list and rules
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.developpez.com%2Factu%2F309621%2FL-UE-vise-les-grandes-technologies-avec-une-liste-cible-et-des-regles-plus-strictes-Bruxelles-elargit-la-recherche-de-pouvoirs-supplementaires-pour-limiter-la-puissance-des-plateformes-numeriques%2F
I invite you to read all my following thoughts to understand more:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/XgEvO1E9kIU
About my thoughts of my political philosophy..
I just want to say that notice that when you read my thoughts
of political philosophy here:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/gyQROkO_yRo
You will notice that the text is not formatted properly in the above link, so what you can do is just go down the page in the above link and click on "forward" to send it to your email and it will be formatted properly when it is sent to your email. You can do the same to my
other links inside the above link when they are not formatted properly.
More philosophy about my next PDF book about my political philosophy..
As you have just noticed, i have just written the following:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't worry, so that to easy the job for you, i have noticed that my thoughts of my political philosophy that i have posted are above 200 pages, so i will soon convert them to a PDF book in english that will be formatted properly, and i will also translate it fast to a PDF book in french that will be formatted properly. And i will put my two PDF books in my website and you will be able to download them and read them.
And after that i will translate fast my book to modern arabic(since i am a white arab) and to other languages.
I speak and write french and english and arabic.
So stay tuned !
---------------------------------------------------------------------
But i think i am smart, so i will provide you with the first version
of my book that will be free for downloading and reading.
And after that i will enhance my PDF book much more and i will sell
it for 9.99$ or 19.99$, but my much more enhanced book will be powerful, since it will be much more inventive and creative, and it will also organize much more efficiently the democratized information on internet.
And as you have noticed i have just said the following:
More philosophy on how to be successful and rich..
I think that there is not only technology and science where you can
make big money and be successful, but you can also become
really successful and rich in the area of "abstraction",
what i mean is that we are in a era of globalization that is
characterized by the democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and democratization of information, but you have to be smart and notice that the democratization of information is not enough,
since the information has to be organized smartly and efficiently, this is where you can become successful and rich by "abstracting" this complexity by organizing the information or the democratized information in such a way that it minimizes efficiently the time to learn and to become efficient, and of course you have to sell this organized information that abstract complexity.
And about my new software products and about my books..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
I just want to say that i have invented four software products,
they are powerful software products, and i think that i will become a Billionaire by selling them.
So stay tuned and you will notice that i am not joking, because it is
all the truth.
But you have to know that i will give almost all the money that i will earn from my above software products to the poors, because i don't need all this money.
And here is my next books that i will write and sell:
- First book is about parallelism and concurrency, and it will also
contain explanation of some of my scalable algorithms and algorithms
that i have invented.
- Second book is about sophisticated artificial intelligence
programming, and it will contain some of my inventions of scalable
algorithms that will be used to make it scalable.
- Third book is about my efficient methodology of thinking and acting
that has permitted me to become smart and successful.
And here is how i am becoming very smart: I am also thinking and acting very efficiently like the following artificial intelligence, read the following about it:
How Swarm Intelligence Is Making Simple Tech Much Smarter
https://singularityhub.com/2018/02/08/how-swarm-intelligence-is-making-simple-tech-much-smarter/
So i will write three books that i will sell and on one of my book i will explain my efficient methodology of how i have become successful.
So stay tuned !
More political philosophy about Democracy and parliamentary Democracy..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms, and i think i am a philosopher,
so now i will do political philosophy about Democracy and parliamentary Democracy, first i will start it by asking the following question:
Wich is better, Democracy or parliamentary Democracy ?
When you are smart you will notice that parliamentary Democracy
is better since Democracy means that the people "govern", but this
way of doing brings desorder, since people doesn't mean that it is Elites that govern, so this is why i think that it is inherent to parliamentary democracy that it is the Elites that govern and guide people, since also we can logically prove it by saying the following:
From where people get a correct judgment in Democracy ?
So you are noticing that to be able to be good judgment in Democracy,
you have to be correct "Elitism" that guides people, and you have to be
Meritocracy to be able to be the necessary quality or perfection, but
then you are noticing that to be able to be Meritocracy there must be
a reward for the merit, by for example rewarding by giving more
money.
But since i am smart i will ask another important philosophical question, and it is the following:
Does parliamentary democracy has requirements, and wich requirements
it has:
From my above logical proof we can say that the first requirement
of parliamentary democracy is: it is the Elites that must govern and guide people, and from the first requirement we can logically infer that the Elites must be competent, so we can logically infer the since they have to be competent so then we can say the the second requirement of parliamentary democracy that it must be meritocratic, and the third
requirement of parliamentary democracy is also an important requirement
and it is that we have to have a constitution that says that parliamentary democracy has to have law enforcement agencies like the USA FBI and military as necessary basic requirements for a country, and a country can become a more global world like European union or such.
More political philosophy about what is the goal of philosophy..
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also invented
many scalable algorithms and algorithms, and i think that i am also a philosopher, so now i will talk about an important subject in philosophy and it is:
What is the goal of philosophy ?
I think there is a difference between doing philosophy like i am doing and the goal of philosophy, and doing philosophy is getting more efficiently into the "details" by being inventive and by more efficiently understanding, but the goal of philosophy is also, first, to know how to be an efficient higher level "abstraction" that abstract complexity so that people do understand efficiently your philosophy, so that people be efficient in this life, and, second, the goal of philosophy is also the following:
I have just read the following article:
How to Live Better, According to Nietzsche
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/nietzsches-guide-to-better-living/568375/
And it says the following:
"More recently, in his Philosophical Investigations (1953), Ludwig Wittgenstein suggested that the aim of philosophy is not to seek the truth but rather to provide relief—“to show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle.” "
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher and i am not in accordance with the above saying of Ludwig Wittgenstein, because i think
that it is by logical analogy like knowing the difference between boolean logic and fuzzy logic, i mean the goal of philosophy is to seek the truth, but philosophy is like Democracy that gives you a certain level of liberty under the "laws" of the society that permits you to think and write your philosophy and it can be philosophy that is the truth or that is a certain level of truth, so it is like fuzzy logic, since we want to let people in democracy diversify there thinking on philosophy(but they have to respect the laws), and the goal of philosophy is that from this philosophical diversity we have to choose what is the best philosophy.
So i will give a good example so that you efficiently understand me, here is the example:
Please read my following thoughts about Turing completeness and parallel programming:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/ju0xEyq36Rc
So notice in the above link of my thoughts how i am explaining by
using the efficient way of learning by "abstraction", so as you will
notice that i am efficiently highering the level abstraction by efficiently wanting you to understand the important things that permits you to be efficient, and this way of doing is also like the goal of philosophy that i explained above.
More philosophy about the way of learning by abstraction..
I will give you an example so that you understand,
so if you ask what is the way of learning by abstraction,
look at my following tutorial where i am presenting
my methodology that, first, permits to model the synchronization primitives of parallel programs with logic primitives with If-then-OR-AND so that to make it easy to translate to petri nets so that to detect deadlocks in parallel programs, please take a look at it because this tutorial of mine is the way of learning by abstraction:
How to analyse parallel applications with Petri Nets
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/how-to-analyse-parallel-applications-with-petri-nets
More political philosophy about survival and more..
We are getting smarter as a matter of survival
Read more here:
https://lemire.me/blog/2013/03/25/smarter-for-survival/
Is genetically engineered intelligence worth it?
Read more here:
https://lemire.me/blog/2013/03/17/is-genetically-engineering-intelligence-worth-it/
More precision about Niklaus Wirth and about the good taste..
I will be more precise:
Having good taste involves knowing what is truly excellent or of genuine value.
Read here to notice it:
What Is Good Taste?
https://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2014/03/what-is-good-taste.html
And as you have just noticed i have just posted the following thoughts
of Niklaus Wirth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth):
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/h_xKwu2gM44
And i think that Niklaus Wirth is too pessimistic on the above thoughts
So you have to know that an efficient education can permit to give you a good taste so that to be able to be efficiently selective, and this
is valid for both the consumers and the producers of products or services, read my following thoughts so that you understand:
And more political philosophy about the good taste..
So let us look in the dictionary at what is the taste, it says the following:
"The taste is the sense by which the qualities and flavour of a substance are distinguished by the taste buds."
Read here in the dictionary to notice it:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/taste
But when you are smart you will also notice that there is also
the intellectual taste from culture or genetics, i mean that
when you are genetically more rational and more smart you will notice that this more rational and more smart is also intellectual taste since with it you are able to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality, and this is also the same for culture, i mean when you enhance more your culture it enhances your intellectual taste and it permits you to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality.
So as you are noticing that the intellectual taste is so important..
More political philosophy of what is my philosophy..
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher, so i will
give you an abstraction of what is my philosophy:
First i invite you to read the following article
The temptation of a capitalism "with Asian values"
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ababord.org%2FLa-tentation-d-un-capitalisme-avec
So i think that the above temptation of a capitalism "with asian values" is not good, i will explain why by giving you an abstraction of what is my philosophy:
I will ask first the following philosophical important question:
From where comes morality ?
I think that morality comes from a balance of powers, like the power of
being social and the power of being economic performance etc. so it
comes from this kind of "diversification", this is why it needs "Democracy", and Democracy needs to forbid extremism that hurts
Democracy and Democracy needs to educate well the people and it needs a competent governance. And look at the following video, since i think that a good education system is the most important thing:
Top 10 Countries with Best Education Systems in the World
Read more here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xhfnjEf8C0
More political philosophy about the mechanisms of Democracy..
I think that we have to be smart, since i have just written
the following about China and Russia of year 2010 and 2012:
----
More about China and Russia and other such countries education system..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, read the following:
“Corruption is pervasive in every part of Chinese society, and education is no exception,” Mr. Li said.
A Chinese Education, for a Price
Read more here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/world/asia/in-china-schools-a-culture-of-bribery-spreads.html
I think we can not be confident with the Chinese education system,
and i don't think it is meritocratic !
It is the same problem in Russia, read the following to notice it:
Mark Levin, a professor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow who has studied the issue, said corruption in universities took place not only during the entrance examinations but also those at the end of semesters. Levin said some students preferred to pay money to pass examinations and obtain a diploma.
RUSSIA: Rising corruption threatens universities
Read more here:
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20100514205552600#:~:text=According%20to%20necessarily%20rough%20estimates,in%202009%20totalled%20%241%20billion.&text=But%2C%20despite%20the%20country's%20increased,much%20the%20salaries%20actually%20are.
----
And also i have just posted about the today China after the anti-corruption compaign in China, read the following:
---
I invite you to read the following interesting article:
China’s Anti-Corruption Campaign and the Challenges of Political Meritocracy
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2020/05/chinas-anti-corruption-campaign-and-the-challenges-of-political-meritocracy/
---
So as you are noticing from my above writing that corruption can corrupt
the education system and when education system is corrupt then the Meritocratic system is corrupt and this is dangerous. So even after the anti-corruption compaign in China , i think that Dictatorship of China is not so efficient at fighting corruption, because Democracy is much better at fighting corruption by competitive elections and free press, read my following thoughts to understand more:
From where people get a correct judgment in Democracy ?
So you are noticing that to be able to be good judgment in Democracy,
you have to be correct "Elitism" that guides people, and you have to be
Meritocracy to be able to be the necessary quality or perfection, but
then you are noticing that to be able to be Meritocracy there must be
a reward for the merit, by for example rewarding by giving more
money.
Now why to be Democracy ?
I think that we have to be more smart and notice that
Democracy is also smart, the big benefits of democracy that it is also
like a morality that is a diversity that prioritize by giving weights to
some important things and processes to be able to succeed, for example
if i ask a question of how to be less corruption ? i think
that Democracy is an enhanced system that fights corruption
more efficiently than dictatorship, i think this is
understandable because to be able to "escape" a local maximum
towards a global maximum(like in artificial intelligence) on efficiency
of fighting corruption (and corruption also means lack of efficiency),
we have to be able to vote for another political party that is more apt
and more efficient at fighting corruption, this is why i think that
democracy is better at fighting corruption, also i think that in
democracy the governance must be a "competent" governance
this is how we will enhance democracy to be the best.
---
More political philosophy about the will of the people in Democracy..
You have to understand that i am also a political philosopher,
but you have to understand that i am not in accordance with
the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau that said that a society can become not organized by the will of the people(it is like saying by democracy), i think that it is a big mistake to say so, since in my political philosophy i am explaining that the will of the people in Democracy is like "constrained" by law enforcement agencies such as the FBI that permit us to be an organized society(read my below thoughts to
understand it), so as you are noticing this constraint is theoretical
and it is an important constraint that makes us understand that we have to be proactive at educating people so that they understand the why of
being democracy and so that to understand how to be democracy and so that to understand the theoretical constraint that says that we have to
be an organized society by providing law enforcement agencies such as the FBI.
Read all my following thoughts to understand my political philosophy:
About more political philosophy about democracy..
I will ask another important question in philosophy:
Can we be confident with Democracy ?
When you are smart you will notice that Democracy is like constrained
by the fact that we have to have law enforcement agencies such as the FBI that permit us to be an organized society(read my below thoughts to
understand it), so it is like the first requirement, and this first requirement has to be organized by laws, but when you are smart you will notice that Democracy has to avoid extremism that hurts Democracy so that to be able to be Democracy, so now you are immediately noticing that the society has as a second requirement that it has to be able to avoid extremism that hurts Democracy by being correctly educated(so we have to be proactive at that) and/or by enforcing it by laws.
And my other important question in political philosophy is the following:
Does a society has to be progressive ?
I will answer by saying "yes", since read my following thoughts about
morality so that to understand it:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/7UmkfURwoU4
More political philosophy about the social contract..
I will start by asking an important question in philosophy:
What are the causes that make us organized into a society ?
And when you are smart you will understand that it depends
on the context, so if we were in the 1762 when Jean-Jacques Rousseau
was writing his philosophy, so i think that a society has been able to be organized by providing a society with law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, since even if being organized in a society takes a part of your freedom, the security that provides law enforcement agencies such as the FBI have a much "greater" weight of importance, so now you are understanding that it is the law enforcement agencies such as the FBI that , in the past, have permitted people to be organized in societies, and as you notice we have also provided the society with other social services and services and taxes that permits the society to be more "apt" at being an organized society that doesn't fail or fall.
More political philosophy about philosophy..
I have just read the following article:
How to Live Better, According to Nietzsche
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/nietzsches-guide-to-better-living/568375/
And it says the following:
"More recently, in his Philosophical Investigations (1953), Ludwig Wittgenstein suggested that the aim of philosophy is not to seek the truth but rather to provide relief—“to show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle.” "
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher and i am not in accordance with the above saying of Ludwig Wittgenstein, because i think
that it is by logical analogy like knowing the difference between boolean logic and fuzzy logic, i mean the goal of philosophy is to seek the truth, but philosophy is like Democracy that gives you a certain level of liberty under the "laws" of the society that permits you to think and write your philosophy and it can be philosophy that is the truth or that is a certain level of truth, so it is like fuzzy logic, since we want to let people in democracy diversify there thinking on philosophy(but they have to respect the laws), and the goal of philosophy is that from this philosophical diversity we have to choose what is the best philosophy.
I give you an example of how i am doing philosophy, so be smart and read
my following thoughts and notice how i am constructing my thoughts of my philosophy:
I think that when you are smart you will understand that being smart
is first efficiently find the patterns with your smartness, and also being smart is being efficient at learning with those patterns, i give
you an example so that you understand:
Take for example functional programming, so we can ask if functional programming is easy or difficult, but when you are smart you will
quickly notice that in functional programming you have to find the patterns and to learn the patterns that permit you to easily think and
program in functional programming, so as you are noticing that in functional programming there is a small finite number of patterns that permit you to do it, so as you are noticing that in functional programming from this small number of patterns you can reduce much more the "complexity".
This is how works smartness, you will first efficiently find the patterns with your smartness and you will after that learn and construct the bigger structures from those patterns.
This is how i am also doing it in political philosophy, i am much more efficiently finding the patterns with my smartness, i give you an example, look at the following pattern that i am finding with my smartness:
--
More explanation about the rule of "work smart and not hard"..
I will be more logically rigorous and explain more, so read my logical proof:
I have just looked at the following video, i invite you to look at it:
People who say "work smart not hard" pretty much always fail | James Gosling and Lex Fridman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jaho2mbaVGM&t=99s
Here is James Gosling:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Gosling
And here is Lex Fridman:
https://lexfridman.com/#:~:text=Lex%20Fridman%3A%20I'm%20an,Teaching%3A%20deeplearning.mit.edu
I think i am a white arab that is smart since i have invented many
scalable algorithms and i say that Lex Fridman and James Gosling in the above video are not smart by saying that "work smart and not hard" pretty much always fail, and notice that Lex Fridman says that
the "not hard" in the rule means lazy, but this is not logically correct, since if the statistical distribution of the strenght and force of the work is normal in the real world , so i have to discern with my fluid intelligence that it is a system that means "work smart and not hard" and it can mean: "work smart and using an average force or strenght", so then it means that this system or rule doesn't pretty much always fail, also we can generalize and say: since the truth of "work smart and not hard pretty much always fail" depends on the statistical distribution(of the strenght and force of the work) in the real world, so we can not generalize and say that the rule of "work smart and not hard" pretty much always fail.
--
I give you another example, look at the following patterns that
i am finding with my smartness:
---
What is it to be smart ?
Read my following thoughts, since i have just corrected a typo:
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart like a genius ,
since i have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, and today i will speak about what is
it to be "smart"..
So i will start it by inviting you to read carefully the following webpage from a Senior Consultant (and former Editor-in-Chief and Publishing Director) of New Scientist and Author of After the Ice:
Why are humans smarter than other animals?
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/12021
So as you are noticing he is saying the following:
--
"The idea of human superiority should have died when Darwin came on the scene.
Unfortunately, the full implications of what he said have been difficult to take in: there is no Great Chain of Being, no higher and no lower. All creatures have adapted effectively to their own environments in their own way. Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy among many others, not the top of a long ladder.
It took a surprisingly long time for scientists to grasp this. For decades, comparative psychologists tried to work out the learning abilities of different species so that they could be arranged on a single scale. Animal equivalents of intelligence tests were used and people seriously asked whether fish were smarter than birds. It took the new science of ethology, created by Nobel-prize winners Konrad Lorenz, Niko Tinbergen and Karl von Frisch, to show that each species had the abilities it needed for its own lifestyle and they could not be not arranged on a universal scale. Human smartness is no smarter than anyone else's smartness. The question should have died for good."
--
So i am smart like a genius and i say that the above webpage is not so smart, because the logical reasoning defect is that he is first saying the following:
"Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy"
This is the first logical defect, since he is like using boolean logic by saying that human smartness is only a particular survival strategy, and this is not correct logical reasoning, because we have like to be fuzzy logic and say that not all humans are using smartness for only survival, since we are not like animals, since we have not to think it only societally, but we can also say there is a great proportion of humans that have transcended there "survival" condition with there smartness to be a much better human condition than only survival. So now we can say with human smartness (and measure it with human smartness) that the humans that have transcended there "survival" condition with there smartness to be a much better human condition have a much superior smartness than animals, since we can measure it with human smartness, and here is the definition of surviving in the dictionary:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/survive
So as you are noticing that survival is only to remain alive, so i am logical in my thoughts above.
The second logical defect of the above webpage is the following:
Notice that the above webpage that he is saying the following:
"Strangley enough, even evolutionary biologists still get caught up with the notion that humans stand at the apex of existence. There are endless books from evolutionary biologists speculating on the reasons why humans evolved such wonderful big brains, but a complete absence of those which ask if a big brains is a really useful organ to have. The evidence is far from persuasive. If you look at a wide range of organisms, those with bigger brains are generally no more successful than those with smaller brains — hey go extinct just as fast."
So i think that the above webpage is not right.
So notice again that he is saying that the brain must be successful in survival, and this is not correct reasoning, since as i said above
smartness is not only about survival, since we have to measure it with
our smartness and notice that from also my above thoughts that we can
be humans that are much more smart than animals even if we go extinct.
So the important thing to notice in my above logical reasoning , is
that you have to measure smartness with smartness, it is the same
as my following logical proof about: Is beauty universal ? ,
here it is , read it carefully:
I will make you understand with smartness what about the following webpage:
Look at the following webpage from BBC:
The myth of universal beauty
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150622-the-myth-of-universal-beauty
So notice in the above webpage that it is saying the following about
beauty:
"Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive"
So you have to understand that the above webpage from BBC is not smart,
i will make you understand with smartness that beauty is universal,
so if we take the following sentence of the above webpage:
"Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive"
So you have to put it in the context of the above webpage, and
understand that the way of thinking of the webpage from BBC is not smart, because it is saying that since in the above sentence starvation is a risk , so heavier weight can be more attractive, but this can be heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes, so it makes a conclusion that universal beauty is not universal, but this is not smart because we have not to measure beautifulness with only our eyes and say that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is not beautiful, because we have to measure it with smartness and say that smartness says that in the above sentence that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is beautiful for smartness because starvation is a risk, so then with smartness we can say that beauty is universal. So we have to know that that the system of reference of measure is very important, by logical analogy we can say that measuring beautifulness with the eyes is like measuring individual smartness with only genetics, but measuring beautifulness with both the eyes and smartness is like measuring individual smartness with both the genetical and the cultural.
---
More philosophy on how to be successful and rich..
I think that there is not only technology and science where you can
make big money and be successful, but you can also become
really successful and rich in the area of "abstraction",
what i mean is that we are in a era of globalization that is
characterized by the democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and democratization of information, but you have to be smart and notice that the democratization of information is not enough,
since the information has to be organized smartly and efficiently, this is where you can become successful and rich by "abstracting" this complexity by organizing the information or the democratized information in such a way that it minimizes efficiently the time to learn and to become efficient, and of course you have to sell this organized information that abstract complexity.
More philosophy about how to be successful..
I have just looked at the following video of the following Ex-Google TechLead:
Overcoming the "loser mindset" | TechLead
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReUz7bskzIM
I think i am smart, and i think that this techlead lacks smartness,
because i think that so that to be successful you have to know what is the weaknesses of the system that permits you to be successful and rich, and you have to be inventive and invent so that to enhance or correct some or all the weaknesses of the system so that to be successful and rich, so then you have to be "prepared" so that to be this "efficiency", look for example at me, i have "invented" many scalable algorithms and many algorithms and many software products so that to be successful and rich, they are added values that bring success, and it is like R&D (Research and development), i can give you more of my ideas that permit you to be successful and rich, but i will write a book that explains my methodology so that to become successful and rich.
And about my new software products and about my books..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
I just want to say that i have invented four software products,
they are powerful software products, and i think that i will become a Billionaire by selling them.
So stay tuned and you will notice that i am not joking, because it is
all the truth.
But you have to know that i will give almost all the money that i will earn from my above software products to the poors, because i don't need all this money.
And here is my next books that i will write and sell:
- First book is about parallelism and concurrency, and it will also
contain explanation of some of my scalable algorithms and algorithms
that i have invented.
- Second book is about sophisticated artificial intelligence
programming, and it will contain some of my inventions of scalable
algorithms that will be used to make it scalable.
- Third book is about my efficient methodology of thinking and acting
that has permitted me to become smart and successful.
And here is how i am becoming very smart: I am also thinking and acting very efficiently like the following artificial intelligence, read the following about it:
How Swarm Intelligence Is Making Simple Tech Much Smarter
https://singularityhub.com/2018/02/08/how-swarm-intelligence-is-making-simple-tech-much-smarter/
So i will write three books that i will sell and on one of my book i will explain my efficient methodology of how i have become successful.
More political philosophy about civilization..
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher, so now i will talk about an important subject and it is related to the following article,
i invite you to read it:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190218-are-we-on-the-road-to-civilisation-collapse
So i think i am smart and i say that the "main" problem of our today world comes from "complexity", what i mean by this is that we have to know how to manage "complexity", and as you are noticing that we are managing complexity by using "abstraction", but this abstraction causes
problems if it is not managed correctly, i mean that too much abstraction is not good for the system, because we have to be the right level of abstraction to be a good reliability and safety. So we can
ask if specialization that is limiting study to a particular area is also abstraction? i think it is abstraction and it can cause problems if it is not managed correctly, this is why we have also to be an "efficient" philosophy that knows how to abstract complexity.
Read the rest of my previous thoughts to understand:
More about learning by the way of abstraction and about specialization..
Here is the definition of the word "specialization" in the dictionary:
Specialization is: limiting study or work to one particular area.
So as you are noticing i am saying in my thoughts below that learning
by the way of abstraction is a specialization, and i think i am correct
since we can say that learning by the way of abstraction or learning greatly by the way of abstraction make us "specialized" in the area of studying and learning by the way of abstraction.
So read my following thoughts to understand:
More philosophy about smartness and abstraction and complexity..
So i will start by asking a question:
Is the way of learning by abstraction an efficient way ?
So when you are smart you will quickly notice that we have
to take into account the "context" of the way of learning by abstraction, and when you are smart you will notice that the way of learning by abstraction is also to reduce complexity, but when you take into account the context you will notice that learning by abstraction is a also a "specialization" and it is also an efficient way of learning when we measure it inside the "context" of abstraction that is the reality, so then we have not to be pessimistic about learning by the efficient way of abstraction since, first, it reduces the complexity and, second, even if we are not understanding the complexity behind the abstraction, learning by abstraction is also an efficient specialization that is efficient for adaptability, so we have to know how to balance between those that are required to understand the complexity behind the abstraction and those that are required to learn by the way of abstraction that is a specialization.
More philosophy about the way of learning by abstraction..
I will give you an example so that you understand,
so if you ask what is the way of learning by abstraction,
look at my following tutorial where i am presenting
my methodology that, first, permits to model the synchronization primitives of parallel programs with logic primitives with If-then-OR-AND so that to make it easy to translate to petri nets so that to detect deadlocks in parallel programs, please take a look at it because this tutorial of mine is the way of learning by abstraction:
How to analyse parallel applications with Petri Nets
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/how-to-analyse-parallel-applications-with-petri-nets
I think i am smart and i will explain more what is smartness..
So that you understand me more, let us say that you are measuring a human IQ, so if it is high human IQ , this value is a measure that is relative to the other human IQs, so you will say that this high IQ is much better at adaptability than the other humans, but it is not correct measure, because even science and technology have constraints that constrain(or limit greatly) the expressiveness of human IQs, so then we can not say that a high human IQ is better at adaptability than the other humans..
More philosophy about how to measure human IQ or human smartness..
I think i am smart, and i will talk about how to measure human IQs or human smartness, first you have to know that you can measure relatively or absolutely, so if you measure the IQ of a human, you will give a value of IQ that is "relative" to the distribution of IQs of humans, so can we ask if it is the right way to measure human IQs? i think it is not, because there is a "very" important thing that is missing, and it is that you have to also measure IQ or smartness relatively to the "constraints" in our reality that constrain(or limit) human IQ or human smartness, and i think this will give a much more realistic measure of human IQs or human smartness, so if you are really smart you will start by searching what are those constraints in the reality that constrain human IQs or human smartness, because this way you will become really smart.
Let me give an example about how to measure IQs or smartness..
So if you are really smart you will give a smart example so that
people can understand, so here it is:
If i say: 2 + 2 = 4
So you will notice that this equality is also constrained by constraints of reality, since for example you are noticing that it is not so mathematically expressive, so this not mathematically expressive is also
constraining human IQ or human smartness, since if you understand and learn this mathematical equality, another person will quickly do the same, so the other person will adapt quickly to this level
of smartness, so now you are noticing the smart idea, it is that even science and technology are constrained the same way, and this constraints on science and technology constrain or limit the expressiveness of high human IQs or high level of smartness so that other lower level human IQs or smartness can attain the level of adaptability of high human IQs, this is what is happening in our today world, and if you are smart you will notice that there is something else that is happening and it is that abstraction of complexity that reduce the complexity is making others not understanding the complexity behind
the abstraction and this is not so efficient.
Here is more about the constraints on science and technology:
Is Science Going To End?
Read more here:
https://philosophynow.org/issues/68/Is_Science_Going_To_End
And read also the following
The Industrial Era Ended, and So Will the Digital Era
Read more here:
https://hbr.org/2018/07/the-industrial-era-ended-and-so-will-the-digital-era
More political philosophy about what is smartness..
I give you an example so that you understand:
If i give the following three words:
I, love, you.
It is not the same as if i give the following five words:
I, love, you, very, much
So you are noticing that the five words permit a more sophisticated
expressiveness, and notice that i am saying more sophisticated, since
the five words bring more efficiency, and this bringing more efficiency
is also what we call smartness, but notice that this smartness is brought by using the "tool" that is composed of the five words, so the tool that is our english language brings smartness, so then we have to be convinced by the fact that the tool like internet brings a much more efficiency and this much more efficiency brings much more smartness, so now you are noticing that smartness is not only genetical or cultural, but it is also the smartness of using the tool, and this is a very important thing, since the tool can be powerful and it can advance very much a human and can make a human really smart. So you have to understand that we are also in an Era of powerful tools such as internet that can advance very much a human and that can make a human really smart.
Read my previous following thoughts to understand better:
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have
also invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
Here is my other wisdom:
With more knowledge, the beautiful of the physical reality becomes less beautiful, since we become more aware of the realities of life, but with more knowledge, it is smartness that becomes more beautiful, and then smartness becomes the beautiful that attracts more, since also with
more knowledge we become a more sophisticated intellectual taste, so more knowledge is an engine that pushes us towards more and more smartness, and smartness is also a good thing that can bring more happiness, and then if happiness is brought more by this more smartness, the beautiful of the physical reality becomes again more beautiful. So i predict that in the near future of 2030 we will become much much more smart and this much much more smartness can bring more happiness, since you have also to take into account the exponential progress of our humanity and the abundance of knowledge such as in internet.
And here is my new proverb..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have also invented many scalable algorithms, and here is my new proverb:
Note that the English dictionary defines "perfection" as: "the act or process of perfecting"
Read here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perfection
This is the definition of perfection above that I use below in my explanation of my new proverb.
Here is all my explanation of my new proverb below:
My new proverb comes to me from the essence of morality that I explained to you in my political philosophy that I wrote in English, since in morality we are pushed towards the pretty tomorrow because we are aware of this pretty perfume that is the perfection that pushes us or encourages us to be or allows us to become perfect or greatly perfect.
Read about it here on my thoughts of my political philosophy about morality:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
So here is my new proverb:
"Life is like the pretty perfume that calls us to be a pretty tomorrow!"
So notice carefully my smart play on words in my new proverb, i think it's smart, and you have to know that the future perfection depends on the present perfection, so when today we are responsibility to be the pretty perfection so that to build the pretty tomorrow, then the pretty perfection of today is part of the pretty tomorrow, and the "pretty perfume" in my new proverb is also the today pretty perfection, but you have to understand the symbolic which allows us to say that being this part of the pretty tomorrow is also like being the pretty tomorrow. It is what makes it a smart proverb.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
More political philosophy about how to manage complexity and more..
In software engineering you can by good code refactoring manage efficiently "complexity", since potential advantages of code refactoring may include improved code readability and reduced complexity; these can improve the source code's maintainability and create a simpler, cleaner, or more expressive internal architecture or object model to improve extensibility.
But to know more about how to manage complexity, i invite you to read
the following very interesting article:
Learning to Live with Complexity
https://hbr.org/2011/09/learning-to-live-with-complexity
Now more political philosophy about specialization and survival..
Look at the following video of DINOSAURS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIX_Pr9ufR8
So what are you noticing ?
So if you are smart you will quickly notice that DINOSAURS
have not survived since they were too specialized ! so now
you are understanding one of the most important rule in political
philosophy and it is that you have to know that being good at adaptability is also knowing how to not be too specialized !
I give you a quick example:
Today you have to know how to diversify economy so that to be good at adaptability, and this diversification is also not being too specialized ! (read below my thoughts about Colombia that wanted and is
wanting to diversify its economy so that to be much more
efficient and much better at adaptability)
I give you another example about being too specialized:
Also lack of decentralization is also being too specialized,
this is why i said about nationalism the following:
I think that nationalism is also like too much "centralization", since this too much centralization of nationalism is like a too much monopolize that also hurts quality, and also i think nationalism is too much competition that lacks collaboration and this causes that it hurts quality too, but you have to also understand that the tendency of our today world is to decentralize for better efficiency, not to become nationalism, read my following thoughts to notice:
Yet more political philosophy about decentralization..
We can say the following:
The classical notion of decentralization does not necessarily imply democracy, and an organization may be decentralized without being based on democratic principles.
But i ask a smart question of:
Can we say that an organization based on democratic principles may be centralized ?
Here is my answer:
But we can notice that even though decentralization doesn't
necessarily imply Democracy, Democracy is a "kind" of decentralization,
and this kind of decentralization brings efficiency because we can
notice that Democracy needs requirements such as competitive elections and free press, and i think that Democracy is more efficient than
Dictatorship at fighting corruption(and corruption can mean lack of efficiency), read my following thoughts about Democracy and more to understand:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/Nudyb_4QCRU
But notice in my above link that i am saying that we have to seek like a balance between competition and collaboration, and i think that it is
this new more efficient model of seeking like a balance between competition and collaboration that is the "cause" of bringing decentralization that brings efficiency, and i think that the tendency of our today world is to seek a balance between competition and collaboration.
I give you another example of being too specialized:
So in "philosophy" we have to ask such the following very important question that is:
Is working in a higher level of abstraction better
than working on a lower level abstraction?
I think that civilization has gone and is going forward towards the future by needing from us to also be "specialization", so i think that both the working at the high level of abstraction and at low level
of abstraction are specializations, we can easily notice
it by noticing that software engineering works at a higher
level of abstraction, and i think it is like a specialization, so i think that computer science is much appropriate way
of understanding, since computer science works both at a higher level of abstraction and at the lower level of abstraction , because computer science understand the how it is made and how to build it to a higher level of abstraction, so computer science is both working at a higher level of abstraction and working at a lower level of abstraction, so it "generalizes" better and it is better for adaptability.
Read more in all my following thoughts to understand better:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/XgEvO1E9kIU
More political philosophy about the smart game that we call human life..
Look at the following video from Colombia:
Colombia's booming tech scene
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxPySfuQO_c
So as you are noticing that the spirit of the Colombian person
that is speaking in the above video is positive(he is positive like me), so as you are noticing that he is playing at the game of human life
that is also to diversify the economy, and he is giving a great
importance to tech industry and he is giving a great importance to
economic integration with other countries, so as you are
noticing it is part of the Global optimization since we have to
be this optimization so that to become efficient worldwide,
so i think that we have to be optimistic since i think that
with the exponential progress of our humanity we will become
much much more efficient in the near future of 2030.
Tech giants' anticompetitive practices investigation - US lawmakers report their findings
"In recent years, each company has expanded and exploited their power of the marketplace in anticompetitive ways."
"Our investigation leaves no doubt that there is a clear and compelling need for Congress and the antitrust enforcement agencies to take action that restores competition, improves innovation, and safeguards our democracy."
Read more here:
https://www.computing.co.uk/news/4021278/tech-giants-anticompetitive-practices-investigation-us-lawmakers-report-findings
EU targets big tech with tighter target list and rules
I have just read the following article, i invite you to read it:
Large platforms are invasive, they pay little tax and they destroy competition. This is not the Internet that we wanted, ”said another source with direct knowledge of Brussels plans.
EU targets big tech with tighter target list and rules
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.developpez.com%2Factu%2F309621%2FL-UE-vise-les-grandes-technologies-avec-une-liste-cible-et-des-regles-plus-strictes-Bruxelles-elargit-la-recherche-de-pouvoirs-supplementaires-pour-limiter-la-puissance-des-plateformes-numeriques%2F
I invite you to read all my following thoughts to understand more:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/XgEvO1E9kIU
About my thoughts of my political philosophy..
I just want to say that notice that when you read my thoughts
of political philosophy here:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/gyQROkO_yRo
You will notice that the text is not formatted properly in the above link, so what you can do is just go down the page in the above link and click on "forward" to send it to your email and it will be formatted properly when it is sent to your email. You can do the same to my
other links inside the above link when they are not formatted properly.
More philosophy about my next PDF book about my political philosophy..
As you have just noticed, i have just written the following:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't worry, so that to easy the job for you, i have noticed that my thoughts of my political philosophy that i have posted are above 200 pages, so i will soon convert them to a PDF book in english that will be formatted properly, and i will also translate it fast to a PDF book in french that will be formatted properly. And i will put my two PDF books in my website and you will be able to download them and read them.
And after that i will translate fast my book to modern arabic(since i am a white arab) and to other languages.
I speak and write french and english and arabic.
So stay tuned !
---------------------------------------------------------------------
But i think i am smart, so i will provide you with the first version
of my book that will be free for downloading and reading.
And after that i will enhance my PDF book much more and i will sell
it for 9.99$ or 19.99$, but my much more enhanced book will be powerful, since it will be much more inventive and creative, and it will also organize much more efficiently the democratized information on internet.
And as you have noticed i have just said the following:
More philosophy on how to be successful and rich..
I think that there is not only technology and science where you can
make big money and be successful, but you can also become
really successful and rich in the area of "abstraction",
what i mean is that we are in a era of globalization that is
characterized by the democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and democratization of information, but you have to be smart and notice that the democratization of information is not enough,
since the information has to be organized smartly and efficiently, this is where you can become successful and rich by "abstracting" this complexity by organizing the information or the democratized information in such a way that it minimizes efficiently the time to learn and to become efficient, and of course you have to sell this organized information that abstract complexity.
And about my new software products and about my books..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
I just want to say that i have invented four software products,
they are powerful software products, and i think that i will become a Billionaire by selling them.
So stay tuned and you will notice that i am not joking, because it is
all the truth.
But you have to know that i will give almost all the money that i will earn from my above software products to the poors, because i don't need all this money.
And here is my next books that i will write and sell:
- First book is about parallelism and concurrency, and it will also
contain explanation of some of my scalable algorithms and algorithms
that i have invented.
- Second book is about sophisticated artificial intelligence
programming, and it will contain some of my inventions of scalable
algorithms that will be used to make it scalable.
- Third book is about my efficient methodology of thinking and acting
that has permitted me to become smart and successful.
And here is how i am becoming very smart: I am also thinking and acting very efficiently like the following artificial intelligence, read the following about it:
How Swarm Intelligence Is Making Simple Tech Much Smarter
https://singularityhub.com/2018/02/08/how-swarm-intelligence-is-making-simple-tech-much-smarter/
So i will write three books that i will sell and on one of my book i will explain my efficient methodology of how i have become successful.
So stay tuned !
More political philosophy about Democracy and parliamentary Democracy..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms, and i think i am a philosopher,
so now i will do political philosophy about Democracy and parliamentary Democracy, first i will start it by asking the following question:
Wich is better, Democracy or parliamentary Democracy ?
When you are smart you will notice that parliamentary Democracy
is better since Democracy means that the people "govern", but this
way of doing brings desorder, since people doesn't mean that it is Elites that govern, so this is why i think that it is inherent to parliamentary democracy that it is the Elites that govern and guide people, since also we can logically prove it by saying the following:
From where people get a correct judgment in Democracy ?
So you are noticing that to be able to be good judgment in Democracy,
you have to be correct "Elitism" that guides people, and you have to be
Meritocracy to be able to be the necessary quality or perfection, but
then you are noticing that to be able to be Meritocracy there must be
a reward for the merit, by for example rewarding by giving more
money.
But since i am smart i will ask another important philosophical question, and it is the following:
Does parliamentary democracy has requirements, and wich requirements
it has:
From my above logical proof we can say that the first requirement
of parliamentary democracy is: it is the Elites that must govern and guide people, and from the first requirement we can logically infer that the Elites must be competent, so we can logically infer the since they have to be competent so then we can say the the second requirement of parliamentary democracy that it must be meritocratic, and the third
requirement of parliamentary democracy is also an important requirement
and it is that we have to have a constitution that says that parliamentary democracy has to have law enforcement agencies like the USA FBI and military as necessary basic requirements for a country, and a country can become a more global world like European union or such.
More political philosophy about what is the goal of philosophy..
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also invented
many scalable algorithms and algorithms, and i think that i am also a philosopher, so now i will talk about an important subject in philosophy and it is:
What is the goal of philosophy ?
I think there is a difference between doing philosophy like i am doing and the goal of philosophy, and doing philosophy is getting more efficiently into the "details" by being inventive and by more efficiently understanding, but the goal of philosophy is also, first, to know how to be an efficient higher level "abstraction" that abstract complexity so that people do understand efficiently your philosophy, so that people be efficient in this life, and, second, the goal of philosophy is also the following:
I have just read the following article:
How to Live Better, According to Nietzsche
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/nietzsches-guide-to-better-living/568375/
And it says the following:
"More recently, in his Philosophical Investigations (1953), Ludwig Wittgenstein suggested that the aim of philosophy is not to seek the truth but rather to provide relief—“to show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle.” "
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher and i am not in accordance with the above saying of Ludwig Wittgenstein, because i think
that it is by logical analogy like knowing the difference between boolean logic and fuzzy logic, i mean the goal of philosophy is to seek the truth, but philosophy is like Democracy that gives you a certain level of liberty under the "laws" of the society that permits you to think and write your philosophy and it can be philosophy that is the truth or that is a certain level of truth, so it is like fuzzy logic, since we want to let people in democracy diversify there thinking on philosophy(but they have to respect the laws), and the goal of philosophy is that from this philosophical diversity we have to choose what is the best philosophy.
So i will give a good example so that you efficiently understand me, here is the example:
Please read my following thoughts about Turing completeness and parallel programming:
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.programming.threads/c/ju0xEyq36Rc
So notice in the above link of my thoughts how i am explaining by
using the efficient way of learning by "abstraction", so as you will
notice that i am efficiently highering the level abstraction by efficiently wanting you to understand the important things that permits you to be efficient, and this way of doing is also like the goal of philosophy that i explained above.
More philosophy about the way of learning by abstraction..
I will give you an example so that you understand,
so if you ask what is the way of learning by abstraction,
look at my following tutorial where i am presenting
my methodology that, first, permits to model the synchronization primitives of parallel programs with logic primitives with If-then-OR-AND so that to make it easy to translate to petri nets so that to detect deadlocks in parallel programs, please take a look at it because this tutorial of mine is the way of learning by abstraction:
How to analyse parallel applications with Petri Nets
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/how-to-analyse-parallel-applications-with-petri-nets
More political philosophy about survival and more..
We are getting smarter as a matter of survival
Read more here:
https://lemire.me/blog/2013/03/25/smarter-for-survival/
Is genetically engineered intelligence worth it?
Read more here:
https://lemire.me/blog/2013/03/17/is-genetically-engineering-intelligence-worth-it/
More precision about Niklaus Wirth and about the good taste..
I will be more precise:
Having good taste involves knowing what is truly excellent or of genuine value.
Read here to notice it:
What Is Good Taste?
https://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2014/03/what-is-good-taste.html
And as you have just noticed i have just posted the following thoughts
of Niklaus Wirth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niklaus_Wirth):
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/h_xKwu2gM44
And i think that Niklaus Wirth is too pessimistic on the above thoughts
So you have to know that an efficient education can permit to give you a good taste so that to be able to be efficiently selective, and this
is valid for both the consumers and the producers of products or services, read my following thoughts so that you understand:
And more political philosophy about the good taste..
So let us look in the dictionary at what is the taste, it says the following:
"The taste is the sense by which the qualities and flavour of a substance are distinguished by the taste buds."
Read here in the dictionary to notice it:
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/taste
But when you are smart you will also notice that there is also
the intellectual taste from culture or genetics, i mean that
when you are genetically more rational and more smart you will notice that this more rational and more smart is also intellectual taste since with it you are able to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality, and this is also the same for culture, i mean when you enhance more your culture it enhances your intellectual taste and it permits you to be more efficiently selective of your knowledge, so it permits you to enhance quality.
So as you are noticing that the intellectual taste is so important..
More political philosophy of what is my philosophy..
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher, so i will
give you an abstraction of what is my philosophy:
First i invite you to read the following article
The temptation of a capitalism "with Asian values"
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ababord.org%2FLa-tentation-d-un-capitalisme-avec
So i think that the above temptation of a capitalism "with asian values" is not good, i will explain why by giving you an abstraction of what is my philosophy:
I will ask first the following philosophical important question:
From where comes morality ?
I think that morality comes from a balance of powers, like the power of
being social and the power of being economic performance etc. so it
comes from this kind of "diversification", this is why it needs "Democracy", and Democracy needs to forbid extremism that hurts
Democracy and Democracy needs to educate well the people and it needs a competent governance. And look at the following video, since i think that a good education system is the most important thing:
Top 10 Countries with Best Education Systems in the World
Read more here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xhfnjEf8C0
More political philosophy about the mechanisms of Democracy..
I think that we have to be smart, since i have just written
the following about China and Russia of year 2010 and 2012:
----
More about China and Russia and other such countries education system..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have invented many scalable algorithms, read the following:
“Corruption is pervasive in every part of Chinese society, and education is no exception,” Mr. Li said.
A Chinese Education, for a Price
Read more here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/22/world/asia/in-china-schools-a-culture-of-bribery-spreads.html
I think we can not be confident with the Chinese education system,
and i don't think it is meritocratic !
It is the same problem in Russia, read the following to notice it:
Mark Levin, a professor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow who has studied the issue, said corruption in universities took place not only during the entrance examinations but also those at the end of semesters. Levin said some students preferred to pay money to pass examinations and obtain a diploma.
RUSSIA: Rising corruption threatens universities
Read more here:
https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20100514205552600#:~:text=According%20to%20necessarily%20rough%20estimates,in%202009%20totalled%20%241%20billion.&text=But%2C%20despite%20the%20country's%20increased,much%20the%20salaries%20actually%20are.
----
And also i have just posted about the today China after the anti-corruption compaign in China, read the following:
---
I invite you to read the following interesting article:
China’s Anti-Corruption Campaign and the Challenges of Political Meritocracy
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2020/05/chinas-anti-corruption-campaign-and-the-challenges-of-political-meritocracy/
---
So as you are noticing from my above writing that corruption can corrupt
the education system and when education system is corrupt then the Meritocratic system is corrupt and this is dangerous. So even after the anti-corruption compaign in China , i think that Dictatorship of China is not so efficient at fighting corruption, because Democracy is much better at fighting corruption by competitive elections and free press, read my following thoughts to understand more:
From where people get a correct judgment in Democracy ?
So you are noticing that to be able to be good judgment in Democracy,
you have to be correct "Elitism" that guides people, and you have to be
Meritocracy to be able to be the necessary quality or perfection, but
then you are noticing that to be able to be Meritocracy there must be
a reward for the merit, by for example rewarding by giving more
money.
Now why to be Democracy ?
I think that we have to be more smart and notice that
Democracy is also smart, the big benefits of democracy that it is also
like a morality that is a diversity that prioritize by giving weights to
some important things and processes to be able to succeed, for example
if i ask a question of how to be less corruption ? i think
that Democracy is an enhanced system that fights corruption
more efficiently than dictatorship, i think this is
understandable because to be able to "escape" a local maximum
towards a global maximum(like in artificial intelligence) on efficiency
of fighting corruption (and corruption also means lack of efficiency),
we have to be able to vote for another political party that is more apt
and more efficient at fighting corruption, this is why i think that
democracy is better at fighting corruption, also i think that in
democracy the governance must be a "competent" governance
this is how we will enhance democracy to be the best.
---
More political philosophy about the will of the people in Democracy..
You have to understand that i am also a political philosopher,
but you have to understand that i am not in accordance with
the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau that said that a society can become not organized by the will of the people(it is like saying by democracy), i think that it is a big mistake to say so, since in my political philosophy i am explaining that the will of the people in Democracy is like "constrained" by law enforcement agencies such as the FBI that permit us to be an organized society(read my below thoughts to
understand it), so as you are noticing this constraint is theoretical
and it is an important constraint that makes us understand that we have to be proactive at educating people so that they understand the why of
being democracy and so that to understand how to be democracy and so that to understand the theoretical constraint that says that we have to
be an organized society by providing law enforcement agencies such as the FBI.
Read all my following thoughts to understand my political philosophy:
About more political philosophy about democracy..
I will ask another important question in philosophy:
Can we be confident with Democracy ?
When you are smart you will notice that Democracy is like constrained
by the fact that we have to have law enforcement agencies such as the FBI that permit us to be an organized society(read my below thoughts to
understand it), so it is like the first requirement, and this first requirement has to be organized by laws, but when you are smart you will notice that Democracy has to avoid extremism that hurts Democracy so that to be able to be Democracy, so now you are immediately noticing that the society has as a second requirement that it has to be able to avoid extremism that hurts Democracy by being correctly educated(so we have to be proactive at that) and/or by enforcing it by laws.
And my other important question in political philosophy is the following:
Does a society has to be progressive ?
I will answer by saying "yes", since read my following thoughts about
morality so that to understand it:
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/7UmkfURwoU4
More political philosophy about the social contract..
I will start by asking an important question in philosophy:
What are the causes that make us organized into a society ?
And when you are smart you will understand that it depends
on the context, so if we were in the 1762 when Jean-Jacques Rousseau
was writing his philosophy, so i think that a society has been able to be organized by providing a society with law enforcement agencies such as the FBI, since even if being organized in a society takes a part of your freedom, the security that provides law enforcement agencies such as the FBI have a much "greater" weight of importance, so now you are understanding that it is the law enforcement agencies such as the FBI that , in the past, have permitted people to be organized in societies, and as you notice we have also provided the society with other social services and services and taxes that permits the society to be more "apt" at being an organized society that doesn't fail or fall.
More political philosophy about philosophy..
I have just read the following article:
How to Live Better, According to Nietzsche
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/10/nietzsches-guide-to-better-living/568375/
And it says the following:
"More recently, in his Philosophical Investigations (1953), Ludwig Wittgenstein suggested that the aim of philosophy is not to seek the truth but rather to provide relief—“to show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle.” "
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher and i am not in accordance with the above saying of Ludwig Wittgenstein, because i think
that it is by logical analogy like knowing the difference between boolean logic and fuzzy logic, i mean the goal of philosophy is to seek the truth, but philosophy is like Democracy that gives you a certain level of liberty under the "laws" of the society that permits you to think and write your philosophy and it can be philosophy that is the truth or that is a certain level of truth, so it is like fuzzy logic, since we want to let people in democracy diversify there thinking on philosophy(but they have to respect the laws), and the goal of philosophy is that from this philosophical diversity we have to choose what is the best philosophy.
I give you an example of how i am doing philosophy, so be smart and read
my following thoughts and notice how i am constructing my thoughts of my philosophy:
I think that when you are smart you will understand that being smart
is first efficiently find the patterns with your smartness, and also being smart is being efficient at learning with those patterns, i give
you an example so that you understand:
Take for example functional programming, so we can ask if functional programming is easy or difficult, but when you are smart you will
quickly notice that in functional programming you have to find the patterns and to learn the patterns that permit you to easily think and
program in functional programming, so as you are noticing that in functional programming there is a small finite number of patterns that permit you to do it, so as you are noticing that in functional programming from this small number of patterns you can reduce much more the "complexity".
This is how works smartness, you will first efficiently find the patterns with your smartness and you will after that learn and construct the bigger structures from those patterns.
This is how i am also doing it in political philosophy, i am much more efficiently finding the patterns with my smartness, i give you an example, look at the following pattern that i am finding with my smartness:
--
More explanation about the rule of "work smart and not hard"..
I will be more logically rigorous and explain more, so read my logical proof:
I have just looked at the following video, i invite you to look at it:
People who say "work smart not hard" pretty much always fail | James Gosling and Lex Fridman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jaho2mbaVGM&t=99s
Here is James Gosling:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Gosling
And here is Lex Fridman:
https://lexfridman.com/#:~:text=Lex%20Fridman%3A%20I'm%20an,Teaching%3A%20deeplearning.mit.edu
I think i am a white arab that is smart since i have invented many
scalable algorithms and i say that Lex Fridman and James Gosling in the above video are not smart by saying that "work smart and not hard" pretty much always fail, and notice that Lex Fridman says that
the "not hard" in the rule means lazy, but this is not logically correct, since if the statistical distribution of the strenght and force of the work is normal in the real world , so i have to discern with my fluid intelligence that it is a system that means "work smart and not hard" and it can mean: "work smart and using an average force or strenght", so then it means that this system or rule doesn't pretty much always fail, also we can generalize and say: since the truth of "work smart and not hard pretty much always fail" depends on the statistical distribution(of the strenght and force of the work) in the real world, so we can not generalize and say that the rule of "work smart and not hard" pretty much always fail.
--
I give you another example, look at the following patterns that
i am finding with my smartness:
---
What is it to be smart ?
Read my following thoughts, since i have just corrected a typo:
I am a white arab, and i think i am smart like a genius ,
since i have invented many scalable algorithms and there implementations, and today i will speak about what is
it to be "smart"..
So i will start it by inviting you to read carefully the following webpage from a Senior Consultant (and former Editor-in-Chief and Publishing Director) of New Scientist and Author of After the Ice:
Why are humans smarter than other animals?
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/12021
So as you are noticing he is saying the following:
--
"The idea of human superiority should have died when Darwin came on the scene.
Unfortunately, the full implications of what he said have been difficult to take in: there is no Great Chain of Being, no higher and no lower. All creatures have adapted effectively to their own environments in their own way. Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy among many others, not the top of a long ladder.
It took a surprisingly long time for scientists to grasp this. For decades, comparative psychologists tried to work out the learning abilities of different species so that they could be arranged on a single scale. Animal equivalents of intelligence tests were used and people seriously asked whether fish were smarter than birds. It took the new science of ethology, created by Nobel-prize winners Konrad Lorenz, Niko Tinbergen and Karl von Frisch, to show that each species had the abilities it needed for its own lifestyle and they could not be not arranged on a universal scale. Human smartness is no smarter than anyone else's smartness. The question should have died for good."
--
So i am smart like a genius and i say that the above webpage is not so smart, because the logical reasoning defect is that he is first saying the following:
"Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy"
This is the first logical defect, since he is like using boolean logic by saying that human smartness is only a particular survival strategy, and this is not correct logical reasoning, because we have like to be fuzzy logic and say that not all humans are using smartness for only survival, since we are not like animals, since we have not to think it only societally, but we can also say there is a great proportion of humans that have transcended there "survival" condition with there smartness to be a much better human condition than only survival. So now we can say with human smartness (and measure it with human smartness) that the humans that have transcended there "survival" condition with there smartness to be a much better human condition have a much superior smartness than animals, since we can measure it with human smartness, and here is the definition of surviving in the dictionary:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/survive
So as you are noticing that survival is only to remain alive, so i am logical in my thoughts above.
The second logical defect of the above webpage is the following:
Notice that the above webpage that he is saying the following:
"Strangley enough, even evolutionary biologists still get caught up with the notion that humans stand at the apex of existence. There are endless books from evolutionary biologists speculating on the reasons why humans evolved such wonderful big brains, but a complete absence of those which ask if a big brains is a really useful organ to have. The evidence is far from persuasive. If you look at a wide range of organisms, those with bigger brains are generally no more successful than those with smaller brains — hey go extinct just as fast."
So i think that the above webpage is not right.
So notice again that he is saying that the brain must be successful in survival, and this is not correct reasoning, since as i said above
smartness is not only about survival, since we have to measure it with
our smartness and notice that from also my above thoughts that we can
be humans that are much more smart than animals even if we go extinct.
So the important thing to notice in my above logical reasoning , is
that you have to measure smartness with smartness, it is the same
as my following logical proof about: Is beauty universal ? ,
here it is , read it carefully:
I will make you understand with smartness what about the following webpage:
Look at the following webpage from BBC:
The myth of universal beauty
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150622-the-myth-of-universal-beauty
So notice in the above webpage that it is saying the following about
beauty:
"Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive"
So you have to understand that the above webpage from BBC is not smart,
i will make you understand with smartness that beauty is universal,
so if we take the following sentence of the above webpage:
"Where starvation is a risk, heavier weight is more attractive"
So you have to put it in the context of the above webpage, and
understand that the way of thinking of the webpage from BBC is not smart, because it is saying that since in the above sentence starvation is a risk , so heavier weight can be more attractive, but this can be heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes, so it makes a conclusion that universal beauty is not universal, but this is not smart because we have not to measure beautifulness with only our eyes and say that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is not beautiful, because we have to measure it with smartness and say that smartness says that in the above sentence that heavier weight that is not beautiful for the eyes is beautiful for smartness because starvation is a risk, so then with smartness we can say that beauty is universal. So we have to know that that the system of reference of measure is very important, by logical analogy we can say that measuring beautifulness with the eyes is like measuring individual smartness with only genetics, but measuring beautifulness with both the eyes and smartness is like measuring individual smartness with both the genetical and the cultural.
---
More philosophy on how to be successful and rich..
I think that there is not only technology and science where you can
make big money and be successful, but you can also become
really successful and rich in the area of "abstraction",
what i mean is that we are in a era of globalization that is
characterized by the democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and democratization of information, but you have to be smart and notice that the democratization of information is not enough,
since the information has to be organized smartly and efficiently, this is where you can become successful and rich by "abstracting" this complexity by organizing the information or the democratized information in such a way that it minimizes efficiently the time to learn and to become efficient, and of course you have to sell this organized information that abstract complexity.
More philosophy about how to be successful..
I have just looked at the following video of the following Ex-Google TechLead:
Overcoming the "loser mindset" | TechLead
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReUz7bskzIM
I think i am smart, and i think that this techlead lacks smartness,
because i think that so that to be successful you have to know what is the weaknesses of the system that permits you to be successful and rich, and you have to be inventive and invent so that to enhance or correct some or all the weaknesses of the system so that to be successful and rich, so then you have to be "prepared" so that to be this "efficiency", look for example at me, i have "invented" many scalable algorithms and many algorithms and many software products so that to be successful and rich, they are added values that bring success, and it is like R&D (Research and development), i can give you more of my ideas that permit you to be successful and rich, but i will write a book that explains my methodology so that to become successful and rich.
And about my new software products and about my books..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
I just want to say that i have invented four software products,
they are powerful software products, and i think that i will become a Billionaire by selling them.
So stay tuned and you will notice that i am not joking, because it is
all the truth.
But you have to know that i will give almost all the money that i will earn from my above software products to the poors, because i don't need all this money.
And here is my next books that i will write and sell:
- First book is about parallelism and concurrency, and it will also
contain explanation of some of my scalable algorithms and algorithms
that i have invented.
- Second book is about sophisticated artificial intelligence
programming, and it will contain some of my inventions of scalable
algorithms that will be used to make it scalable.
- Third book is about my efficient methodology of thinking and acting
that has permitted me to become smart and successful.
And here is how i am becoming very smart: I am also thinking and acting very efficiently like the following artificial intelligence, read the following about it:
How Swarm Intelligence Is Making Simple Tech Much Smarter
https://singularityhub.com/2018/02/08/how-swarm-intelligence-is-making-simple-tech-much-smarter/
So i will write three books that i will sell and on one of my book i will explain my efficient methodology of how i have become successful.
More political philosophy about civilization..
I think i am smart and i think i am a philosopher, so now i will talk about an important subject and it is related to the following article,
i invite you to read it:
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190218-are-we-on-the-road-to-civilisation-collapse
So i think i am smart and i say that the "main" problem of our today world comes from "complexity", what i mean by this is that we have to know how to manage "complexity", and as you are noticing that we are managing complexity by using "abstraction", but this abstraction causes
problems if it is not managed correctly, i mean that too much abstraction is not good for the system, because we have to be the right level of abstraction to be a good reliability and safety. So we can
ask if specialization that is limiting study to a particular area is also abstraction? i think it is abstraction and it can cause problems if it is not managed correctly, this is why we have also to be an "efficient" philosophy that knows how to abstract complexity.
Read the rest of my previous thoughts to understand:
More about learning by the way of abstraction and about specialization..
Here is the definition of the word "specialization" in the dictionary:
Specialization is: limiting study or work to one particular area.
So as you are noticing i am saying in my thoughts below that learning
by the way of abstraction is a specialization, and i think i am correct
since we can say that learning by the way of abstraction or learning greatly by the way of abstraction make us "specialized" in the area of studying and learning by the way of abstraction.
So read my following thoughts to understand:
More philosophy about smartness and abstraction and complexity..
So i will start by asking a question:
Is the way of learning by abstraction an efficient way ?
So when you are smart you will quickly notice that we have
to take into account the "context" of the way of learning by abstraction, and when you are smart you will notice that the way of learning by abstraction is also to reduce complexity, but when you take into account the context you will notice that learning by abstraction is a also a "specialization" and it is also an efficient way of learning when we measure it inside the "context" of abstraction that is the reality, so then we have not to be pessimistic about learning by the efficient way of abstraction since, first, it reduces the complexity and, second, even if we are not understanding the complexity behind the abstraction, learning by abstraction is also an efficient specialization that is efficient for adaptability, so we have to know how to balance between those that are required to understand the complexity behind the abstraction and those that are required to learn by the way of abstraction that is a specialization.
More philosophy about the way of learning by abstraction..
I will give you an example so that you understand,
so if you ask what is the way of learning by abstraction,
look at my following tutorial where i am presenting
my methodology that, first, permits to model the synchronization primitives of parallel programs with logic primitives with If-then-OR-AND so that to make it easy to translate to petri nets so that to detect deadlocks in parallel programs, please take a look at it because this tutorial of mine is the way of learning by abstraction:
How to analyse parallel applications with Petri Nets
https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/how-to-analyse-parallel-applications-with-petri-nets
I think i am smart and i will explain more what is smartness..
So that you understand me more, let us say that you are measuring a human IQ, so if it is high human IQ , this value is a measure that is relative to the other human IQs, so you will say that this high IQ is much better at adaptability than the other humans, but it is not correct measure, because even science and technology have constraints that constrain(or limit greatly) the expressiveness of human IQs, so then we can not say that a high human IQ is better at adaptability than the other humans..
More philosophy about how to measure human IQ or human smartness..
I think i am smart, and i will talk about how to measure human IQs or human smartness, first you have to know that you can measure relatively or absolutely, so if you measure the IQ of a human, you will give a value of IQ that is "relative" to the distribution of IQs of humans, so can we ask if it is the right way to measure human IQs? i think it is not, because there is a "very" important thing that is missing, and it is that you have to also measure IQ or smartness relatively to the "constraints" in our reality that constrain(or limit) human IQ or human smartness, and i think this will give a much more realistic measure of human IQs or human smartness, so if you are really smart you will start by searching what are those constraints in the reality that constrain human IQs or human smartness, because this way you will become really smart.
Let me give an example about how to measure IQs or smartness..
So if you are really smart you will give a smart example so that
people can understand, so here it is:
If i say: 2 + 2 = 4
So you will notice that this equality is also constrained by constraints of reality, since for example you are noticing that it is not so mathematically expressive, so this not mathematically expressive is also
constraining human IQ or human smartness, since if you understand and learn this mathematical equality, another person will quickly do the same, so the other person will adapt quickly to this level
of smartness, so now you are noticing the smart idea, it is that even science and technology are constrained the same way, and this constraints on science and technology constrain or limit the expressiveness of high human IQs or high level of smartness so that other lower level human IQs or smartness can attain the level of adaptability of high human IQs, this is what is happening in our today world, and if you are smart you will notice that there is something else that is happening and it is that abstraction of complexity that reduce the complexity is making others not understanding the complexity behind
the abstraction and this is not so efficient.
Here is more about the constraints on science and technology:
Is Science Going To End?
Read more here:
https://philosophynow.org/issues/68/Is_Science_Going_To_End
And read also the following
The Industrial Era Ended, and So Will the Digital Era
Read more here:
https://hbr.org/2018/07/the-industrial-era-ended-and-so-will-the-digital-era
More political philosophy about what is smartness..
I give you an example so that you understand:
If i give the following three words:
I, love, you.
It is not the same as if i give the following five words:
I, love, you, very, much
So you are noticing that the five words permit a more sophisticated
expressiveness, and notice that i am saying more sophisticated, since
the five words bring more efficiency, and this bringing more efficiency
is also what we call smartness, but notice that this smartness is brought by using the "tool" that is composed of the five words, so the tool that is our english language brings smartness, so then we have to be convinced by the fact that the tool like internet brings a much more efficiency and this much more efficiency brings much more smartness, so now you are noticing that smartness is not only genetical or cultural, but it is also the smartness of using the tool, and this is a very important thing, since the tool can be powerful and it can advance very much a human and can make a human really smart. So you have to understand that we are also in an Era of powerful tools such as internet that can advance very much a human and that can make a human really smart.
Read my previous following thoughts to understand better:
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have
also invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..
Here is my other wisdom:
With more knowledge, the beautiful of the physical reality becomes less beautiful, since we become more aware of the realities of life, but with more knowledge, it is smartness that becomes more beautiful, and then smartness becomes the beautiful that attracts more, since also with
more knowledge we become a more sophisticated intellectual taste, so more knowledge is an engine that pushes us towards more and more smartness, and smartness is also a good thing that can bring more happiness, and then if happiness is brought more by this more smartness, the beautiful of the physical reality becomes again more beautiful. So i predict that in the near future of 2030 we will become much much more smart and this much much more smartness can bring more happiness, since you have also to take into account the exponential progress of our humanity and the abundance of knowledge such as in internet.
And here is my new proverb..
I am a white arab and i think i am smart since i have also invented many scalable algorithms, and here is my new proverb:
Note that the English dictionary defines "perfection" as: "the act or process of perfecting"
Read here:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perfection
This is the definition of perfection above that I use below in my explanation of my new proverb.
Here is all my explanation of my new proverb below:
My new proverb comes to me from the essence of morality that I explained to you in my political philosophy that I wrote in English, since in morality we are pushed towards the pretty tomorrow because we are aware of this pretty perfume that is the perfection that pushes us or encourages us to be or allows us to become perfect or greatly perfect.
Read about it here on my thoughts of my political philosophy about morality:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.culture.morocco/7UmkfURwoU4
So here is my new proverb:
"Life is like the pretty perfume that calls us to be a pretty tomorrow!"
So notice carefully my smart play on words in my new proverb, i think it's smart, and you have to know that the future perfection depends on the present perfection, so when today we are responsibility to be the pretty perfection so that to build the pretty tomorrow, then the pretty perfection of today is part of the pretty tomorrow, and the "pretty perfume" in my new proverb is also the today pretty perfection, but you have to understand the symbolic which allows us to say that being this part of the pretty tomorrow is also like being the pretty tomorrow. It is what makes it a smart proverb.
Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.
0 new messages