The essence of the Truth

[rami18]

Hello.........


You have to read all my following post to understand correctly:

The essence of the Truth

What is a Truth ? what is the essence of the Truth ?

That's an important question..

Philosophy is like mathematics, because Philosophy must be based on
efficient morality and efficient morality is optimization and
optimization is performance and reliability.

So if you look at mathematical logic..

What is mathematical logic ?

Mathematical logic is also being conscious and feeling the space-time..

Here is why:

Now I will give my explanation of what is consciousness...

I hope that in my previous messages you have understood my explanation
of how the consciousness of time is generated by our brain, I have said
that the brain has a sense of direction that makes it possible to say
that one object is left or on the right and back or front etc., and the
brain is also able to see space in 3 dimensions with the sense of the
gaze for example, that is to say to give coordinates as cartesian or
polar in three dimensions to objects in the space of reality, and also
the brain by means of the sense of touch and the eye is capable of the
sense of the measurement of the magnitudes in the space of reality,
these are ingredients of the brain which gives birth to the
consciousness of time, for consciousness
of time means that for two objects that follow each other, we
are able to feel the existence in space
of the back of the first object (by the sens of the orientation of the
brain) Which is for example "nothing", and that one also feels the
existence in the space of the back of the second object which is the
first object, and that we are therefore able to associate the back of
the second object to the word "before", and this is how the
consciousness of time is engendered ... now i come to a question even
more important, but what is consciousness really?
i start with an example so that you can understand what
it really is: when you touch your hands with water
very hot, you are able to feel the pain and
to say that it is you who feel the pain, so the meaning
of touch is closely linked to the consciousness of the "I", but
Let us return, if you like, to the experiences of a child,
you will notice that a necessary condition for the child
to be able to learn and understand is to be able to
ask the question of "what is", but you see this question has as a
necessary condition the consciousness of the self, for when the child
arises, question of "what is" is that it would mean:
"I would like to know what it is", and the "I would like to know"
demonstrates the presence of a consciousness of the pre-ego which
guide the questioning of the child, but then what is this
awareness of the pre-ego that guides the questioning that
makes a consciousness too? Here is my answer: I believe that
as in the case of the sense of touch which is in close relationship
with the consciousness of the ego, the act of reflection is also a sens
as the sens of touch that is able to make us feel that
we exist and feel the space in three dimensions, as for touching the
very warm water that allows us to feel that the feeling of hot water
hurts us ... what would I like to say?
that the sens of touch and the sens of smell for example are adjoined
to space-time to give a better consciousness of space-time,
that is, the ideas we have of space-time are not
, for example, just rules of logic, but also are recorded with
sensations of touch and other sensations to give a better
consciousness, so the act of reflection is not just able to logically
reason with simple rules of logic for building more complex logic rules
etc. But it is also capable of associating space-time sensations with
objects that are displaced in a 3-dimensional world, and therefore my
theory makes us see the act of thought as also being also another sens
that resembles the sens of touch , this is my explanation of how the
consciousness and consciousness of the ego is engendered by the brain.

When you say in mathematical logic:

A or B

How do you think you understand this logical rule?
You must go back to your childhood when you were
to learn it, you were told for example there are two balls,
and you had to take just one and give it back, and the teacher
made us understand for example the following: when you want to take two
balls you are informed with gestures that it is NO,
And when you just take one and turn the ball back, you get
to know that it is YES, therefore I affirm that it is thanks to the
existence of space-time which is also a consequence of our interior
sensation of the space-time which gives the consciousness of space-time,
I mean you are able for example with your brain
to feel and understand what BEFORE or BEHIND
Or LEFT or RIGHT, and you are able to feel the
space and to say that it exists and what it is, so you
are able to feel the space-time, and this sensation
in our brain that we have of space-time helps us
to understand the logical rule of: A or B, or the logical rule
of: A and B.

So let us return to the following theorem in mathematical logic:

If A then B, and if B then C, then A then C.

So how do you understand the:
If A then B? As in my explanation above, you can not
understand this rule without being conscious and without feeling
space-time, because even if you are a blind person, you can
feel your individuality and your singularity
which is the consciousness of the ego, and this self-consciousness
is a consequence of the sensation in our brain of space-time that allows
us to feel that the object which is
"WE" is different from other objects etc. Then what makes
even the blind man feels the space-time and is capable
to say that this object is before that object in time,
So it is able to understand the logical rule of:
If A then B, and since he is capable of doing so, he is capable, thanks
to the sensation of the space-time
that we have in our brain, that permit us to understand
The following theorem:

If A then B, and if B then C, then A then C.

This is my evidence based on the empirical facts
and this proves that mathematical logic is also a consequence
of the sensation that we have in our brain of space-time,
without this sensation we can not, in my opinion, understand
mathematical logic, and since the machine is incapable of
feeling like a human being space-time, then
we can not say that artificial intelligence
Is capable of achieving the emergence of
consciousness.

Now what is the truth ?

In mathematical logic the truth is rooted on our consciousness
and feeling of space-time as i have explained, so the reference
is space-time, so we are capable of deducting the truth by
mapping mathematical logic to our consciousness and our feeling
of the space-time, this is i think the reference that permit
to measure the Truth and define the Truth. And in the mathematical Set
theory that's the same as logic. Also the reference is important,
the reference can be general or it can be relative, as i have explained by:


Getting more rational...

Today i will ask a question of: what is love ?

And the answer must be more rational.

So we have to use smartness..

Like the theorems of Kurt Gödel, there is something that seems happening..

If you say that there is still some suffering in your life..

You can come to a deductive conclusion that it is not love.

But if you choose a reference as being one person that is suffering more
than you, you will conclude that your "some" suffering is considered to
be part of good, and this good is part of love.

So as you have noticed there seems like there is a contradiction in the
system..

But this is just our senses, my rationality says that if the reference
is individual morality, so the person above will say that some suffering
is not love.

But if the reference is general morality of the society, you will say
that this some suffering is considered to be part of good, so it is part
of love.

So this relativeness to the general reference that is general of
morality of the society is a good measure i think.

It is like when we are asking the questions of:

What is the essence of corruption ? and how can we measure corruption ?

I have said that optimization measures corruption of morality.

How it can measure it?

Optimization is performance and reliability, and Efficiency is part of
optimization, efficiency is: you have the ressources that is our
universe(we are part of the universe) and our other universes, and you
have to produce an output from this input that is our universe or
universes that is performant, it is performance, so it is related to
the essence of quality, so today because of our own essence that
knows also about quality, we are measuring corruption of morality
by the level or degree of quality, that means by performance and
reliability, and we are measuring craziness and foolishness by the level
or degree of quality, that means by performance and reliability, so if
the level or degree of quality is lower and not tolerable, we say that
it is corruption of morality or it is craziness or foolishness.

How can we measure the level and degree of quality ?

It is like saying that such thing is relative to such thing, also it is
a process that is dynamic, so if our civilization is at time t1 is
more performant and more reliable, we say that this degree of more
reliable and more performant is the level or degree of quality that
measures corruption of morality. So optimization that is performance and
reliability measures corruption of morality in a such way.

I give you an example..

If at time t1 our civilization has only one machine or robot, and this
civilization and one robot or one machine are capable of being more
performance and more reliability with this one robot or one machine, but
they are doing less performance and less reliability, we call this
corruption of morality.

About the essence of the language of love..

The language of love is love..

But what is the language of love ?

You will say that such song of the Beatles is love..

But this is narrow view that doesn't answer the question of what
is the essence of the language of love..

The relativeness to the general reference that is general morality of
the society is a good measure to measure love, as i said before

So the essence of the language of love must be rooted on general
morality that must be efficient morality, and efficient morality must
be optimization that is performance and reliability.

So as you see I am speaking right now the language of love..

So you hear for example that: Justice must constrain happiness
and responsability must constrain justice, that's not the language of
love.. because that's not a correct view, because we are constrained
by empirical moral that says that a kind of tolerance over
responsability plays the role of an heuristic that optimizes our
economic system and our social system, like when we are applying a kind
of tolerance over arab immigrants that are useful to the economic system
and to the social system, so usefulness is the key point also that
optimizes the system and that constrain the system to be a kind of
tolerance over responsbility by not saying that arab immigrants are not
as beautiful as white europeans and be discrimination with them, that's
not the language of love, because the language of love is also
optimization that mandate a kind of tolerance over responsability, this
is the same when i say that optimization is the language of love also ,
because we must know how to be compassion and respect and love towards
arabs and africans to attract consumers and to higher consumer
confidence index, also democracy is subjected to a constrain of
financial and banks institutions that have there rating methodology that
take into account the Political Risk factor and the economic conditions,
this is a counter-power that creates more quality and more world
stability because we have to optimize our economic systems and by being
responsable by being also responsable governance, other than that
compassion and respect can be virility and they are like mandatory for
the system, because compassion and respect gets us more organized
because neglecting compassion and respect cause violence and extremism
that make our society unstable and less optimized , so tuning
compassion and respect right with social services and medical services
and with educational services and with help to the people to avoid
violence and extremism is also more stability and more power , so this
compassion and respect is virility. So as you see optimization is the
language of love.

And what is the essence of corruption ? and how can we measure corruption ?

I have said that optimization measures corruption of morality.

How it can measure it?

Optimization is performance and reliability, and Efficiency is part of
optimization, efficiency is: you have the ressources that is our
universe(we are part of the universe) and our other universes, and you
have to produce an output from this input that is our universe or
universes that is performant, it is performance, so it is related to
the essence of quality, so today because of our own essence that
knows also about quality, we are measuring corruption of morality
by the level or degree of quality, that means by performance and
reliability, and we are measuring craziness and foolishness by the level
or degree of quality, that means by performance and reliability, so if
the level or degree of quality is lower and not tolerable, we say that
it is corruption of morality or it is craziness or foolishness.

How can we measure the level and degree of quality ?

It is like saying that such thing is relative to such thing, also it is
a process that is dynamic, so if our civilization is at time t1 is
more performant and more reliable, we say that this degree of more
reliable and more performant is the level or degree of quality that
measures corruption of morality. So optimization that is performance and
reliability measures corruption of morality in a such way.

I give you an example..

If at time t1 our civilization has only one machine or robot, and this
civilization and one robot or one machine are capable of being more
performance and more reliability with this one robot or one machine, but
they are doing less performance and less reliability, we call this
corruption of morality.

Communication, simplicity, feedback, respect

Those are essentials steps also, you have to know how to communicate
your your ideas and how to simplifying them correctly, and efficient
communication is also efficient abstration, so you have to know how to
decompose and how to abstract the essentials to be able to communicate
efficiently, and this better reliability and correctness, feedback is
also important, i mean like the testing phase, you have to improve your
ideas layer by layer and incrementally using the patience of science ,
because as i have said your perception takes time to be correct
perception , so you have to know how to be patience of science waiting
for your perception to be set correctly, this is in accordance with
efficient morality and in accordance with Liberty.

So as you have seen we have to be able to think correctly using
the tools of logic and rationality, like the following:

Deductive reasoning is when, given certain premises, conclusions are
unavoidably implied. Rules of inference are used to infer conclusions
such as, modus ponens, where given “A” and “If A then B”, then “B” must
be concluded.

And you have to take into account the following:

Consistency, which means that no theorem of the system contradicts another.
Validity, which means that the system's rules of proof never allow a
false inference from true premises.
Completeness, which means that if a formula is true, it can be proven,
i.e. is a theorem of the system.
Soundness, meaning that if any formula is a theorem of the system, it is
true. This is the converse of completeness. (Note that in a distinct
philosophical use of the term, an argument is sound when it is both
valid and its premises are true).

And there is also:

inductive reasoning, which covers forms of inference that move from
collections of particular judgements to universal judgements

And there is also:

Abductive reasoning (also called abduction, abductive inference,] or
retroduction) is a form of logical inference which starts with an
observation then seeks to find the simplest and most likely explanation.
In abductive reasoning, unlike in deductive reasoning, the premises do
not guarantee the conclusion. One can understand abductive reasoning as
inference to the best explanation, although not all uses of the terms
abduction and inference to the best explanation are exactly equivalent.



Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.