Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming.threads > #4669

More political philosophy now..

Show all headers | View raw

Hello...

Read this:


More political philosophy now..

I think the success of  USA has to be that USA has to understand the
way USA is governed, take for example the separation of powers,
What is the separation of powers?

The U.S. Constitution set up three separate but equal branches of 
government: the legislative branch, or Congress, makes the law; the 
executive, led by the president, executes the law; and the judicial, or 
courts, interprets the law.

But we have to be smarter than that, the separation of powers is not 
"sufficient", so we have to be smarter and know that the legislative 
branch has to understand how to make the legislative branch successful !
look for example at USA , its congress is constituted with both 
conservatives and democrats, but this legislative branch has to 
understand a very important requirement that the legislative branch has 
to know how to be "moderation" to not cause violence or civil war
inside the system ! this is the key to success ! thus the legislative 
branch of USA has to avoid "extremism" that causes violence or civil war 
inside the system , so it has to know how to be "moderation" !

I have proved that morality is perfection at best.

But this perfection at best must know the following:

What is the essence of a human society ?

We can not call a human society a society if it is not "order" , order 
is fondamental to a society, but there is not only order but also the 
sens of "sacrifice", and there is hard sacrifice and soft sacrifice,
if we want today to be a "civilization", we have not to generalize 
"hard" sacrifice, like being a warrior type of people, like soldiers of 
an army, to the general population and tell them to be this hard 
sacrifice, because this violence of warriors like the military and the 
police has to be kept in control inside the sphere of the military and 
the police so that to not cause violence in the rest of the society, 
this is the same for the hard sacrifice of other part of the population 
like scientists and engineers, because they are doing a "hard" work and 
we can call it "hard" sacrifice, so to be able to call a civilization by 
the name of a civilization , we have not to generalize this "hard" 
sacrifice to the rest of the population and tell all the population to 
be hard sacrifice, because it is too much violence, and the rest of the 
population that is not hard sacrifice has to understand that there is 
also what we call "soft" sacrifice that is much less violence such as 
being tolerance and being compassion and helping the others without 
being a hard sacrifice.

Now i think there is something really important about the essence of 
humanity, i think that it is "related" to morality, i said that morality 
is perfection at best, and the goal to attain is the goal of life that 
is to attain absolute perfection or absolute happiness, so morality that 
is perfection at best is pushed towards absolute perfection or absolute 
happiness, but we have to do more philosophy to understand better the 
essence of human evolution, i think that morality of past history has 
needed more "diversity" to be able for humans to survive and to be more 
quality, and diversity has given "immensity" or big "quantity", and you 
can notice it inside the evolution of life, that life has needed a 
greater number of monkeys and many tests and failures by evolution on 
them to evolve towards quality and smartness and so that the monkey 
become human and smartness of human. So as you are noticing  "diversity" 
has given "immensity" or "big" "quantity" and that both diversity and 
immensity or big quantity have given quality and smartness(read below 
about the essence of smartness to notice it). This is too how "morality" 
has evolved, morality has needed diversity and immensity or big quantity 
so that to be more perfection, this is why morality too of today is 
needing diversity and immensity or big quantity so that to be 
perfection, and morality of today knows that perfection of today is also 
having the right "imperfections" (that are also diversity) to be
able to be the right perfection(read what i wrote about neo-nazism below 
to notice it).

What is the essence of truth ?

This is a good subject of political philosophy !

How do we measure the truth ?

The truth is measured by our our senses and by our smartness and by 
rationalism and by empiricism !

So i think we can feel the relativeness of truth, i mean that the truth
is measured by a reference of measure , but there can be many references 
of measure  that gives different results of truth ! and thus we have to 
"prioritize" to be able to succeed ! i give you an example:
when i said (read below) that decent morality has to be measured by the 
reference of measure that is perfection at best so that the government
enforce more correctly "order", this government needs to prioritize
wich of the reference of measures of the truth are more "valid" !
so there is the reference of measure that is happiness or absolute 
happiness , but since law enforcement of "order" that is of a "highest"
priority, so the "truth" of: is it decent morality or not ? must be 
measured by the reference of measure that is perfection at best in 
itself so that to say that it is decent morality or not ! so here again 
you are noticing the relativeness of the truth since the reference of 
measure is choosen among many and is prioritized !

Read my following previous thoughts about the essence of smartness and 
the essence of morality, about the essence of smartness and the essence 
of morality so that you understand better:


What is the essence of human smartness ?

This is a good subject of political philosophy..

So we have to be smarter to answer it correctly..

Individual human smartness is composed of genetical
smartness and cultural smartness..

But if you keep talking about individual smartness neglecting
the smartness of a group of humans, this is not correct.

But what is the smartness of a group of humans ?

It is composed of individual smartness , and the smartness
of the interaction of the group of humans, but this is not
a sufficient definition because it must be more understood,
because the smartness of the interaction of a group of people
is also the fact that we have to know that you can fail to solve the 
problem because you have not found the right "path" that is more hidden
to smartness that leads to the solution of the problem, and this makes 
us understand that the smartest among us can fail at solving a problem 
or inventing algorithms if he didn't find the correct path that is more 
"hidden" to smartness that leads  to the solution of the problem , and 
this is why we can say that a great number of people that are smart and 
less smart can permit us to find the  path that is more hidden to 
smartness that leads to the solution of the problem, so this makes us 
understand that the smartness of a "group" of humans is also dependent 
on less smart people that can find the right path that is hidden to 
smartness that leads to the solution of the problem. This is why our 
world needs arabs and needs white europeans and needs asians and needs 
south americans etc. to be able to solve problems and to be able to 
invent new things.


More about me:

As you have noticed i am a white arab, and a more serious computer 
programmer, but you have to know more about me, my father is very
smart, the genetical IQ of my father is 135, and my
genetical IQ is around 120, but i have lost some IQ points because
my nutrition was not so good because i was disliking many vegetables
and my nutrition was not balanced so i have lost some IQ points
because of this envirenmental factor, but my genetical IQ is around 120.


And i invite you to read the following webpage:

Raise Your Child’s IQ with Multivitamins

http://tipsdiscover.com/health/raise-your-childs-iq-with-multivitamins/



And here is my proof of what is morality:


About the essence of morality

More political philosophy now..

If you have noticed on my writing i said that:

1- Morality is reliability

And i said that:

2- Morality is reliability at best

And i said that:

3- Morality is perfection at best.

But you will have the tendency to say that my above definitions
are not correct thinking, but here is my logical proof of my above
definitions:

When i said that:

1- Morality is reliability


Look at the dictionary here:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reliability

It says that:

Reliability is: The quality or state of being reliable.

So when i say that: Morality is reliability that means that it can
be Morality is the quality of being reliability, so it is like a
"concept" of reliability, that means that it can vary from 0% to 100%,
and we know that since morality is perfection at best from my following
logical proof:

Because morality exists because we have to avoid the bad
And we have to avoid the bad by also trying to maximize at best the good
And trying to maximize at best the good is also called: perfection at best
So morality is pushed towards absolute perfection
So that to be able to solve all our problems
And be absolute happiness that is the goal
But morality of today must at least be a decent morality
To avoid desorder and violence inside the system

And we know that it is inherent to maximizing at best the good that
it is also minimizing at best "failures", so i think my above logical
proof is correct.

So when i say above that:  Reliability is the quality of being reliable,
it means that the quality of being reliable is also measured by
measuring prefection at best, because being reliability is also
solving the problem to be able to be perfection at best.

Also when i say Morality is reliability, it means that it is not only
that reliability is the quality of being reliable, but it is
also a state of being reliable, because as i said in my above logical proof:

"But morality of today must at least be a decent morality
To avoid desorder and violence inside the system"

That means that reliability that is the quality of being reliable must
be at least decent morality, because without being at least decent
morality we can not call it morality, because there is like a constrain
over morality that must be at least decent morality to be able to call
it morality.

So here again we have to be smart, how can we "measure" to be able
to call it decent morality ? here again we have to be smart, there
is "absolute" measure and "relative" measure, so you can measure
morality by absolute measure that is "absolute perfection" that
is like absolute happiness, or you can measure morality relatively
by "happiness", or you can measure morality relatively by
the actual perfection at best in itself ! and i think that we have
to measure morality by the actual perfection at best and say
for example that this actual perfection at best is "order" that enforce 
calling morality a decent morality , so  the actual perfection at best 
can call morality a decent morality to enforce "order" that is "necessary".

Also i think that the tendency of today is that Perfection at best of 
today is balancing perfection with "civilization" so that to not being 
savagery or desorder.

Now i also said also that:


And i said that:

2- Morality is reliability at best

And i said that:


3- Morality is perfection at best.



And that can be understood by my above proof and my above writing.


More political philosophy now..

I will speak about an important subject in political philosophy:

As you have noticed beauty and love has been created by wildness of
nature, and after that in the past since perfection was not enough to
ensure a decent morality , that is a decent perfection, humans have
behaved more violently with wars and by practicing slavery etc, so in
that past people were suffering more desorder and violence etc, so i
think we have to be wiser by looking at our actual morality that is
perfection at best,and to be able to judge it more "wisely", so do we
have to be pessimistic of our morality ? i don't think so, because there
is a also  a big constrain that morality has to be at least a decent
morality that is a decent perfection to avoid desorder and violence
inside the system, but here comes an important question: How to judge
that it is a decent morality ? here again there is also interpretation
of neo-nazism that is too violent that don't know how to tune
perfection correctly, because neo-nazism is racism and it is extremism
of "perfection" this is why they are discriminating too much, and this
is not perfection at best that is morality, because perfection(and thus
morality) is also knowing how to maximize at best success by minimizing
at best failures, here again to be successful at minimizing the failures
you have to "prioritize", this is why neo-nazism must know how
to accept the right "imperfections" to be able to be "correct"
perfection, this is why countries such as Canada and other european
countries are accepting arab immigrants even if some arab immigrants
are less beautiful than white europeans, because beautifulness is
interpreted as being less important than the fact that arab
immigrants are useful for economic growth and for the the social system
etc. and this is morality that prioritize to be able to be successful,
this is why neo-nazism that is too violent towards immigrants is not
correct morality that knows how to manage itself, so i don't
agree with neo-nazism and such idelogies that contain many bugs.




Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

Back to comp.programming.threads | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

More political philosophy now.. Horizon68 <horizon@horizon.com> - 2018-10-10 15:52 -0700

csiph-web