Hello..

More philosophy about the essence of philosophy..

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

I have spoken before in my thoughts of my philosophy about the essence
of morality, here is my thoughts about the essence of morality, read
them carefully:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/7UmkfURwoU4

Now i will talk about the essence of philosophy..

So we can ask a philosophical question of what is an "essence" of this
or that?

I think it is like in computer science or in Petri Nets when we try to
find the "invariants" of the system, since i think the essence of this
or that system is like the invariants that form the "basis" of this or
that system and that don't change with time, so look carefully in my
above thoughts of my philosophy about the essence of morality, and you
will notice that i am abstracting the essence of morality by saying that
it is "perfection at best", and the "at best" is also here in my
definition to "model" correctly the essence of morality,
so now we can ask a philosophical question of:

What is the essence of philosophy ?

I think the essence of philosophy is also that philosophy is high level
layer of abstraction of morality, i mean that the essence of philosophy
is like a high level language like C# and not like the machine language,
i mean that the essence of philosophy is the high level abstraction of
the way of morality that is perfection at best.

More philosophy about inventiveness and creativity..

I just written the following:

"So look carefully at how i am using abstract logical thinking, since i
am for example below making logical analogies between inventiveness and
creativity by talking about USA, since i think that an invention has not
to be constructed from nothing, since i also think that an invention can
be an invention if it contains an added value that has a great
importance, so then we can not say that an invention has to be
constructed from nothing, so then we can say that inventiveness looks
like creativity since i think being creative is bringing an added value
of a great importance"

So i think i am smart and i will explain more the above with like a
logical proof:

I said above that an invention can be an invention if it contains an
added value that has a great importance, and also i just said above that
i think being creative is bringing an added value of a great importance,
since the importance of the creation or invention is also logically
inferred from the fact that we have to be "diversification" that makes
us satisfied, so then an individual invention or creation of an average
importance become of great importance since it is part of an all
creations or inventions that satisfy a great part of the people,
so then we can logically infer that a creation or invention of an
average importance has a great added value.

More philosophy about my kind of philosophy..

If i ask a philosophical question of:

Who am i ?

I will answer that i am also like my philosophy, i mean that i am a
disciplined person and i think i am creative, this is why you are
noticing that i am abstracting in my philosophy by avoiding the less
important details, so i can ask a smart question of: How am i
abstracting my philosophy ? so, i am abstracting my philosophy by not
being it a too reductionist system like the too reductionist system of
Economic Liberalism of Adam Smith and this is a very important thing, so
you are noticing that i am prioritizing so that to be efficient because
i am thinking rapidly and inventing rapidly my thoughts of my
philosophy, so you have to know how to prioritize so that to be
successful, so look carefully at how i am using abstract logical
thinking, since i am for example below making logical analogies between
inventiveness and creativity by talking about USA, since i think that an
invention has not to be constructed from nothing, since i also think
that an invention can be an invention if it contains an added value that
has a great importance, so then we can not say that an invention has to
be constructed from nothing, so then we can say that inventiveness looks
like creativity since i think being creative is bringing an added value
of a great importance, so then you are noticing below that my logical
analogies are much more precise, also notice how i am abstracting in my
philosophy by talking about Japanese Ikigai and more in my thoughts here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/YZSYxV41-qI

So you are noticing that my philosophy is using abstract thinking
and it also uses my fluid intelligence so that to find some important
patterns and also my abstract thinking of my philosophy must not be a
too reductionist system as i have just said.

More about nationalism and about capitalism..

I think i am smart, and i am not like neo-nazis and white supremacists,
since i think that they are stupid people, since there is a pattern
that they have to see and it is the following:

Nationalism comes also with racism and hate between white europeans and
not white europeans and between blacks and not blacks etc., so it has
the tendency to being too much competition and it lacks too much on
cooperation and collaboration that are so important, so then nationalism
is not good for capitalism and nationalism lacks too much on efficiency,
this is the first problem, second problem is with nationalism like
neo-nazism that needs dictatorship , this dictatorship is also lack of
efficiency because we have to understand the advantages of Democracy so
that to understand, so read my following thoughts of my philosophy on
Democracy so that to understand:

Here is what my political philosophy says about Democracy..

More political philosophy about Democracy and Morality..

And now i will start by asking a philosophical question:

Is Democracy morality ?

I will say that Morality is about exactness and how to be the exact
perfection, note that the English dictionary defines "perfection" as:
"the act or process of perfecting", read here to notice it:

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

And Democracy is a mechanism that permits to avoid corruption of
morality and corruption of morality is also lack of efficiency and it is
extremism that hurts Democracy, and Democracy doesn't mean that people
have to govern, because it is absurdity, but Democracy is the "tool" of
Morality, since morality wants to be the exact perfection , this is why
it needs Democracy, and Morality or society have to be "progressive",
read my following writing of my political philosophy about morality to
know that they have to be progressive:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/7UmkfURwoU4

And 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

More political philosophy about Democracy and parliamentary Democracy..

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.