Hello,

More of philosophy about Democracy and the Evolutionary Design methodology..

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

I will make a logical analogy between software projects and Democracy,
first i will say that because of the today big complexity of software
projects, so the "requirements" of those complex software projects are
not clear and a lot could change in them, so this is
why we are using an Evolutionary Design methodology with different tools
such as Unit Testing, Test Driven Development, Design Patterns,
Continuous Integration, Domain Driven Design, but we have to notice
carefully that an important thing in Evolutionary Design methodology is
that when those complex software projects grow, we have first to
normalize there growth by ensuring that the complex software projects
grows "nicely" and "balanced" by using standards, and second we have to
optimize growth of the complex software projects by balancing between
the criteria of the easy to change the complex software projects and the
performance of the complex software projects, and third you have to
maximize the growth of the complex software projects by making the most
out of each optimization, and i think that by logical analogy we can
notice that in Democracy we have also to normalize the growth by not
allowing "extremism" or extremist ideologies that hurt Democracy, and we
have also to optimize Democracy by for example well balancing between
"performance" of the society and in the Democracy and the "reliability"
of helping others like the weakest members of the society among the
people that of course respect the laws, and so that to understand more
my thoughts of my philosophy about Democracy, i invite you to read them
here:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/vlDWhmf-MIM

And about extremist ideologies like white supremacism, i invite you to
read my following thoughts about them:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/mjE_2AG1TKQ

More of my philosophy about entropy and about how morality is universal..

I think i am smart, and i am explaining below why morality is universal,
but as you have just noticed i have just said that so that to say
that morality is universal, it requires from us to know about the
requirements such as why to be a global world etc., so there must be a
level of consciousness, other than that i will make you feel and see
much more that morality is universal since i am seeing it:

So take for example the human imperfections or world imperfections,
i say that it is because we have those imperfections that also we have
morality, and those imperfections causes entropy(A state of disorder and
disorganization), this is why we have to be more and more perfection so
that to maintain order and so that to attain perfection of being much
more perfect or perfect, for example humans are working in there
everyday life so that to also maintain order or so that to become
perfection or much more perfection, and maintaining order is also that
we are perfectioning so that to not to become disorder.

More of my philosophy about why morality is universal..

I think i am a smart philosopher, and i will now explain why
morality is universal:

So take a look at the thing that we call "time", so you can naively look
at our everyday life and say that time is not relative, but
you can like Einstein analyse it and prove that time is relative,
and morality is the same, so when you naively look at it you will
think that morality is relative, since you can notice that for example
there is many countries with many laws and rules, but when you analyse
it you will notice that the goal of morality that we become perfect or
much more perfect pushes us forward towards more and more perfection
since we have to solve our problems such as our many imperfections, it
is also why morality is "progressive", so then the essence of morality
become that morality is progressing towards the goal that is that we
become perfect or much more perfect, so then the other details of
morality are abstracted, so then those acts of humans perfectioning or
perfecting towards a much more perfect world or perfect world and that
are also codified as morality become that morality is universal, since
also we can take this essence of morality as the most important thing.

More of my philosophy about the superhuman of the philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche..

I think i am smart philosopher, and i will be more precise in my logical
proof of why the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche believed, like the
philosopher Spinoza, that morality is not universal, so notice carefully
how the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche has wanted to construct a new
type of man that is a superhuman in his view and this superhuman in the
philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is a superhuman that has mastery over
his emotions and it is a superhuman who takes joy in simply existing, so
as you are noticing that the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is an
inferior philosopher since he wanted to apply the morality of the strong
to the morality of the weak in not wise manner, also you can
notice it more by him saying the following and recognizing that
there is different types of morals, and here is his saying:

"It is the will to power that must be expressed, not the morals of the
slaves or the weak."

That means in french:

"C'est la volonté de puissance qui doit s'exprimer, non
pas la morale des esclaves ou des faibles.",

So the above saying of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is a proof
that he recognized that there is different kinds of morals like the
morals of the slaves or the weak and morals of the strong humans or the
strong. Read more my following thoughts about it and about Stoicism and
existentialism and about how i am explaining that the essence of
morality is universal:

More of my philosophy about the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche and more..

I have just looked at the following video about:

NIETZSCHE - L'exaltation de la vie

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

I think i am a philosopher that is smart, and i think that the
philosophy of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche is not good, since
he says that: "C'est la volonté de puissance qui doit s'exprimer, non
pas la morale des esclaves ou des faibles.", that means in english: "It
is the will to power that must be expressed, not the morals of the
slaves or the weak.", and he said that it needs to construct a new man
that we call the superhuman, but I think that i am a philosopher that is
smart and i am understanding the philosophy of the philosopher Friedrich
Nietzsche, and i think that it is an inferior philosophy, because it
seeks to construct the superhumans from humans and this superhuman in
the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche is a superhuman that has mastery
over his emotions and it is a superhuman who takes joy in simply
existing, so as you are noticing that it is an inferior philosophy,
because how can you be able to take joy in simply existing ? so as you
are noticing it is illogical and it is as illogical as Stoicism(read my
below thoughts about Stoicism) and i think that it is a violent
philosophy as Stoicism, this is why the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsch
is a failure as Stoicism, and here is what i said about Stoicism:

More of my philosophy about my philosophy and about Stoicism and
Existentialism..

I invite you to read this very interesting article about philosophy:

Why philosophers could be the ones to transform your 2020

https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20200114-why-philosophers-could-be-the-ones-to-transform-your-2020

And notice that it says the following:

“The Stoics suggest that what’s most important in order to lead a good
life is internal rather than external. It’s about developing the right
character, the right state of mind,”

I think i am a philosopher that is "smart", so i make you notice the
logical bug in the above saying about Stoicism, and it is that
developing the right character and the right state of the mind in
Stoicism needs the cultural side that also comes from the external
reality and hence from the "purpose" and the "meaning of life", and we
can notice that Stoicism is not so smart, because how can we develop
self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions
and such without the necessary requirements that have to give enough
hope or a meaning of life that gives the necessary self-control and
fortitude? so this is why i think that Stoicism as a philosophy is a
failure, so what's about existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul
Sartre ? Jean-Paul Sartre said that: "Existence precedes essence" or in
french: "L'existence précède l'essence", and it is the central claim of
existentialism of the philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, but i think that
this claim is not so logical, since it is like a debate that asks the
question of: Wich is more important, the genetical side or cultural
side?, and we have to notice that the essence or nature of a human is
"not" enough and it needs for example a meaning of human life and a
purpose etc. so then notice that existentialism of Jean-Paul Sartre, and
like in absurdism of the philosopher Albert Camus, says that human life
is absurd, but here again my new philosophy says that human life is not
absurd, and read it below.