Hello,

More of my philosophy about sex and about civilization..

I am a white arab, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

I think i am smart, and when i look at sex, it is like layers of
sophistication from the low unsophisticated layer that is sex that comes
from our animal instincts to the much higher layer of sophistication that transcend our animal instincts, sex is for me like an inferior state of being alcoholic, since sex is for me a really inferior thing, this is why i am working harder so that to transcend
towards a much higher level of sophistication, and this is
why you are seeing me talking about universal Love as i am talking, and this is why i am talking about my philosophy and about my strengths,
so you have to read my below thoughts carefully so that to
understand my way of thinking and doing:

More of my philosophy about Gays and Lesbians and bisexuals..

I invite you to look at the following video about gays and lesbians in
France:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgOcE27EXN0

I have just quickly noticed how gays and lesbians and bisexuals of the above video speak about there weaknesses, so i think that gays and lesbians and bisexuals have the tendencies to speak about there weaknesses as such, and it is not my way of doing, and as i can say in french: "Si j'ai un bouton moche sur mon corps qui ne part pas, devrais-je parler aux autres de ce bouton moche ? alors tu comprends bien que ce n'est pas la bonne méthode de faire, car c'est mal vu de parler ainsi de ses faiblesses aux autres, alors comme tu comprends bien il faut du savoir-vivre ensemble, car les relations humaines ont besoin de règles à suivre."

Here is the translation in english:

"If I have an ugly pimple on my body that won't go away, should I tell others about that ugly pimple? So you understand that this is not the right way to do, because it is frowned upon to talk about your weaknesses to others in this way, so as you understand well, you have to know that human relationships need rules to follow so that to be able for us to be organized correctly into a society."

This is why you are noticing that i am talking as i am talking by also showing my strenghts to others, so i invite you to read my following
thoughts so that to understand my kind of personality:

More of my philosophy about what is the american dream..

I will ask a philosophical question of:

Does the american dream exists? and if it exists what is it ?

I think the american dream is the fact that becoming rich doesn't come
only from being smart, since becoming rich can come from "creativity",
and I have just talked before about the importance of the following
statement in business:

"The focus should be on the product, since if the product is good
the profits will follow"

But notice that it is saying that if the product is good then the
profits will follow, so as you are noticing we have to define what
is a good product or service ? and does a good product or service only comes from science or from engineering or from being smart? not at all !, since the product and service can become good by the process of creativity, and then we have to define creativity, and creativity needs globalization, since creativity and innovation come from ideas circulating and combining across nations and industries, and i invite you to read about what is creativity in the following interesting web page from Yale university:

What Is Creativity?

https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/what-is-creativity

And is the american dream the working hard ? i don't think so,
since i think that working efficiently is the the good way,
since read my following writing so that to notice it:

I invite you to look at the following interesting video to understand
that working efficiently can make you work much less hours,
for example Germany works really efficiently and it works much
less hours than Mexico or USA, so i invite you to look
at the following interesting video so that to understand
that working efficiently is a great thing:

Why is working harder making us poorer?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD784CHYhGM

More of philosophy about one of my proverbs about intellectual openness and more..

I think i have just invented fast a proverb and i think it is really
important, and here it is:

"Human vitality comes from intellectual openness and intellectual openness also comes from divergent thinking and you have to well balance divergent thinking with convergent thinking so that to converge towards
the global optimum of efficiency and not get stuck on a local optimum of efficiency, and this kind of well balancing makes the good creativity."

And i will explain more my proverb so that you understand it:

I think that divergent thinking is thought process or method used to generate creative ideas by exploring many possible solutions, but notice that we even need openness in a form of economic actors that share ideas across nations and industries (and this needs globalization) that make us much more creative and that's good for economy, since you can easily notice that globalization also brings a kind of optimality to divergent thinking, and also you have to know how to balance divergent thinking with convergent thinking, since if divergent thinking is much greater than convergent thinking it can become costly in terms of time, and if the convergent thinking is much greater than divergent thinking you can get stuck on local optimum of efficiency and not converge to a global optimum of efficiency, and it is related to my following thoughts about the philosopher and economist Adam Smith, so i invite you to read them:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/ftf3lx5Rzxo

More of my philosophy about is Human smartness just a particular survival strategy..

I think i am a smart philosopher and i will explain more,
notice in my below writing that the Senior Consultant (and former Editor-in-Chief and Publishing Director) of New Scientist and Author of After the Ice said the following:

"Human "smartness" is just a particular survival strategy"

I think it is stupid, because when you become rich using your smartness you transcend "survival" and you cease to use smartness as only
a survival strategy and you can start to use your smartness to become more and more rich or/and to living a much better human life etc. or when you have a high salary you are not thinking much of the time about survival since survival is only to remain alive, but you are living and being in a much better human condition, so this proves that Human smartness is not just a particular survival strategy.

More of my philosophy about beauty and about human smartness..

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and as you have just noticed
i have just explained more the basis of my philosophy(read it below)
and now i will ask two philosophical questions and they are the following:

Are humans smarter than other animals?

And does universal beauty exists ?

So i will answer the first philosophical question by saying the following:

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 think i am smart and 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: