Answer:

Before you start reading about system philosophy I did like to say system philosophy is not an easy branch of knowledge to learn if you aren’t familiar with philosophy in general. System philosophy is one tier higher to existing philosophy, with much more complicated system-based concepts. This systematic approach to understanding isn’t easy even to philosophy scholars around the world, and it is still being researched upon today, right now.
Most of the people will ask, how would it help me? System philosophy is a philosophy that will change your entire reality of the world in the perspective of the system(s). It isn’t a tool for a very specific purpose, because system philosophy will change everything you see around you and every action you execute. With the support of this new branch of systematic thinking, you will be able see the complexity layering of everything around you and beyond. Its applications is endless as you will come across from my topics and topics of explanations.

Answer:

It is easier for me to bring in topic by talking about the most recent influential research: physics to quantum physics - a branch of physics that literally threw current modern physics out of water, its application seems like it is impossible and yet it is now already achieved (such as entanglement effect and future quantum computing by using photon rotational data). Biology to DNA modification research - a very specific branch out of biology that research into DNA modification and its effect on living matter. Record, decoding, analysis and understanding.... Then modification of the DNA to influence biological life forms. Engineering to 3D printing technology - a new branch of engineering that turns raw element into stuff where it would become more useful. Its future application can be atomic scaled printing that leads to bio-printing, nano structure printing, and its application seems to be endless as everything in this universe is made out of matter.... And if you can put raw atom into its order to become an object? You can use your imagination to fill the gap.
Lastly, philosophy to system philosophy. You may never heard of system philosophy before. Which is normal, and it would actually be abnormal if you heard about system philosophy before me. System philosophy redefines philosophy to a WHOLE new, and bigger extend than what philosophy already is, and adds the systematic interpretation to it that makes it a structurally powerful for: creation of system-specific philosophies, and overlapping connection between them all.
However, that is just the literate side of it. System philosophy's true nature and its application is much more mind bogging. What makes it all game-changing is the way system philosophy CREATES system-specific philosophies that is capable of explaining "systems" that was known otherwise to be impossible to ever define. These systems can be human's action (or biological life's formulation of action), or just a new systematic approach of understanding to our existing universe. And these system-specific philosophies is so powerful that just one single system philosophy that was created to define human's action, it revolutionizes the field of psychology, politics, philosophy by using ONE system of explanation to EXPLAIN everything within that system; it literallt means, there won't be a question that I cannot answer within that specific system. This resolution of one system, infinite solution rather than traditional one question, one answer revolutionizes the complexity of human logic making it beyond what is known to be ever possible.
A metaphor would be: Human is like a computer, with a CPU as its centre core for data interpretation and analysis. System philosophy would be the most powerful CPU in the world that would change your entire perception of the world, and giving you this systematic approach for much more complex logic understanding that gives you AN LEAD, in everything you do.

Fact:

System philosophy is private and personal research project started since 2010. I am the only lead researcher in line for system philosophy's core research. So all information related to system philosophy is controlled and managed by me, one person. There isn't a need for a massive team for any of the research.... Unless you are talking about realization methods of system philosophy; which it is taken into separate account away from research dedicated branch.
One of the misconception is my family's involve within field of philosophy. As my dad wrote books and have been into philosophy years before me. However, my philosophy research and entirely new and completely separated from his research. Educationally speaking some background story: I am computer major while my dad is language and business major. My dad used to be successful business man who earned enough money for his life time before he was 35, until he quit his career and got into writing books on universal philosophy meant to unify everything in existence. For me, I have been focused to have a computer related career since before I was in Intermediate school. It may be genetic that I got so much involved with philosophy so suddenly, from nearly none to everything during 2010. It may be forever a paradox, but as a philosophical scientist, I cannot find any other influence other than my own on why of such sudden changes. Maybe is there is no external forces, it is just the fact we have our own absolute perspective about this world.... Such perspective changes our meaning of life so suddenly, so influentially, so forcefully... Oh well. Even myself thinking about it, it makes me wonder. But there was never any regret, unlike other subjects. It is like as if you become a scientist by accidentally discovering atoms existence that made you a scientist rather than a chef, for example.
There are many conspiracy about me, but it is none of that ever will matter to you. It is also unsaid, but true: our research extend beyond just system philosophy. Actually, I can say our work is 99% basic philosophy concept with 1% of systematic-conceptual links that hooks everything together, but it is better to not to say it that way. It is also unsaid, but we have many background research and special interests that involves around system philosophy. And one of the best special interest would be the promotion of humanitarian logics: as system philosophy would be nothing but paper, if without people who think logically and rationally. Believe it or not, fewer than 10% of the population have the right logics that makes them reasonable not just in society's general perspective, but also scientifically logically; which is low. However, good news: the society as a whole have a near 100% of general logic done correctly when everyone within the society the have share of information, and when it lasts a length of time for everyone to see different logics around the subject; in turns, even if it isn't done correctly, it will become correctly to standard by the society anyway.
The share of special interest cannot influence the research itself. As declarative rules are unbreakable, or else system philosophy wouldn't become what it is. In another words: no matter which type of influence is inflicted upon the research itself, it cannot change the core behaviour of the research, or else it would no longer persist of any values that makes it one.

Answer:

I am not the one who invented it. I only discovered it given the information there is no other person knowing about it; it applies to everything human can discover just because people didn't invent the universe, everything is already a given factor.
Why? Let's talk about some of the backgrounds of system philosophy. I started on the research since Junior year in high school, where before that time I never took any philosophy classes. There is no absolute concepts I get inspirations from, other than system philosophy itself. In nearly every sense, system philosophy will feel unfamiliar as for comparison with any other philosophy in existence.
Then it passed later series of research relates to the topic. One of the research was done in language. Language is known to be the simplified version of concepts, you can often find traces to philosophy by connection of words, then one can in which relate. Definition of words from over a culture, and its development can express the general view of the entire culture, and their understanding of the subject relates to the word. Another research is effect analysis. Where as the cause is value system, and find traces of its effect upon people. However, so far the continuous effort to locate close relation is rarely seen and no direct connection was ever found; even if one direct trace is found, further analysis will be taken, and later discover it is indirectly involved.

Challenge accepted:

Don't get me wrong. Classification of topics isn't always useful to you, than it is to philosophical researchers. One of the top tier classified research is on the definition of life. The path which lead me to believe life of its own is nothing but a empty shelled system. The variable that influences the system leads to extreme variations that makes "infinite" possibilities. So in control of the system would in theory be the ultimate meaning of life.
Research at that time, which was few years ago before system philosophy was invented of course.... Had some theoretical experiments to test if the concept stands. We looked at newly born babies on different animals, their behavior and growth. The conclusion is classified, but in reality: system does indeed play the most essential role for all that matters, but there are biological "imprints" or variables that plays influential roles as well. One of the argument was: the system itself is built biologically, so does the imprints. There is no conclusive answer to what is the difference. So it is conceptually declarational, which is bad. However, the strong point remains: use your senses of right or wrong. Occasionally, human logic on its own nature can solve impossible problems.
It wasn't until system philosophy was invented, when I solved the system of human action that I realized it is more than just that. Ultimate meaning of life isn't just about one system, there are more systems out there that held greater tiers. I knew about it during the development of system philosophy main branch, but the idea just seemed blank at that time. Even though there is more systems to unlock.... My ultimate goal was actually completed. Why? Because I took control of the system that creates system philosophies; system philosophy main branch. But then of course.... I am a wild card. My ultimate goal is nothing but a variable that is constantly changing. So I would say my ultimately goal at that few moments in time was completed.

Answer:

To be a researcher, your ability to process large amount of information is important. You must understand your field of research clearly and without any mistakes whatsoever, this mind of dedication will determine whether or not if you are going to be successful in that field. There are many research topics I have gone thru over the years, and some of them will be unsolvable for specific logical reasons. Often times, those topics triggers a set of conceptual illogicalities that if you claiming to know the solution for those topics, it would automatically makes you an amature. Visual example for conceptual trap can be: all of your statements about an ideology becomes pointers that points to an conclusion; however, if your pointer points to an conclusion that is illogical, it would be an end of the whole thing to be flawed.
You might also ask: Why would you need such trigger points?
I don't personally use it. I only use it for system philosophy related research as a part of my systematic content filtering process. However, using it too much during research made me adopting to be using it in real life, for general philosophies around me. The only people who complain about conceptual traps are people who doesn't care about the future of philosophy development by ignoring fatal flaws within them; applies to both research and public. But it is out of my area of worry, in system philosophy we gain the importance by taking care of traditional philosophy issues, it is still up to the public to choose to have a broken system or a conceptually perfect system that protects and be around you in that specific system.

Answer:

Informalities comes down to the core beginning of the research; it was never meant to be a official public research project. But its potential bought in some forms of formalities by force. However, informalities does not mean or should stereotype a research to be badly organized.
Mainly, the informalities comes from a philosophy where to me: as long as the values is there, who cares if I am trying to sell a product while sitting on a toilet? This philosophy might not be liked by many people, particularly among philosophers who are more of ancient conservationists who prefer me to sit down, with cup of tea in hand and chat talk philosophy in a temple or something. But no. That is not how it is going to work. I want people to change for a little, even before they made contact with system philosophy; if they can't adopt this simple change of motion? Chances are: they won't adopt to a bigger change, and it isn't going to be a logical choice, it will just be a declarational ignorance.
You will also see informalities in terms of research papers/topics published from me/this website. Because again, they are all personal and private research. Most of the papers are aimed at my perspective of interpretation of words, in the very end, my focus have been over the fact: living person as a philosophy is way more powerful than a philosophy on paper. There are just "handling" application issues that can only be solved when a person is involved, than a book. It is like a book about building a gun, or a gun in its physical form. With a book, you have to fill the gap with your own knowledge of words and use of your mind to fill the gaps about a gun, or you can have a gun in its physical form, and see everything in front of your eyes in rawest possible data, a human person can achieve.

Answer:

Before the discovery of value system, I found no interest in philosophy whatsoever, just never cared. People who gained degree in philosophy rarely find a job nor stands out in the society. The truth is that current philosophy is all flawed; there is no point of getting such degrees learning false concept anyways. Besides, I personally believe there is no major philosophy concept that I am missing out that I don’t know about, nor it matters because I only care about system philosophy branch. After the discovery of value system. Seeing such concept never stands out in the society, that is when interests rush into me.

Answer:

I can only share the one that makes the most difference in public. Value system defines exception; the rare cases. Current philosophy is so called partially perfect which is illusively perfect to certain group of people that shares certain identical point of view. Sadly, it is no longer going to work because it never cover the 100% of human population because every single one of us is an exception; in both DNA and concept wise. That is how the exception is the key to flawless concept.
But it is actually a behaviour characteristic that have to be present for all system philosophy to be considered as one.

Answer:

One of the misconception about philosophers is that philosophers always put philosophy into quotes that people can apply to their life the moment that they sees it. But that is just ancient philosophers. As system philosopher I decided to change that. The ideology is pretty straight forwards from facts: philosophy is the study of thinking. Language is created to simplify ideas/concepts into another forms of data for exchange between others. While philosophy is in raw data, language would be a more compressed data form with its own separate pattern. If a person is trying to make sense out of philosophy thru patterns or rhyme of language/words.... They are just doing it wrong. You can compress from philosophy to language, but never from language to philosophy as in terms of the source.
I wouldn't say it is bad for people to create philosophical quotes, because some of them are compact and meaningful, they do actually promote philosophical thinking at times. Maybe, it is just a different race track for system philosophy and typical philosophy as the main focus, is different from one another in their core levels. For me, it is more about the whole system, than some half missing, incomplete, lack of exception handling philosophy you get out of philosophical statements/quotes.
Personally, I found philosophers around me are more into quotes. Using language as somewhat a base structure for their philosophy. So such influences is always there in me, but it always comes down to my logical thinking to decide which path to go, and to defend my path indefinitely. Another element that contributes is actually, system philosophy isn't always just philosophy research. Much of the core of system philosophy is absolute scientific patterns. They need to be comprehended beyond just words, but people's personal belief, feeling of it.

Answer:

Flawless concept isn’t just the philosophy idea that is impossible to prove false. People never had a flawless concept in history whatsoever. It is again due to the fact if so; this world the words like good and bad would be removed. Word value would replace them because it is much more realistic, efficiently accurate. Reasoning for this isn’t going to shared, but think about why.

Answer:

People were given the “false” definition of value. A definitional sense of value that is more associated with currency than others. People were able to use the word value to associate with feelings, emotion, etc. But the progress is far from the true definition to even do anything.

Answer:

Value is everything. Everything has its value in your mind. How much is air? That value changes. Right now it is worthless, but then you need it… Its price changes. I believe this is from existing values just modified a little, but it is a hint to value system.

Answer:

How you define atheist in extreme details? A person who believe in God/religion briefly? I don’t believe in God/religion but I do believe in what creates God/religion. Yes. It is concept. I do believe in concept that creates god/religion. Bible never talked about who created God (oh yes. I did read the Bible a few times because I was in an after program for three years that is Christian/church financed) I personally believe the reason is very simple. They knew what they are doing. Personally; non value system wised, I believe religion is really a good practice. It generates illusive visible value (this is one of the terms of value system’s value classification; it is pretty much straight to the point anyways. Between I am not going to share this definition publically).

Answer:

I already finished few books regarding to value system. Sadly, they aren’t going to be released. I am going to give speech everywhere I go talking about the “effects of value system”. Effect of value system isn’t value system, but they are generated from value system. Example would be new definition of love, family, action, etc. Of course, this isn’t the finalization of everything. I might release the books of value system if I see people actually care and eagerly seeing such change in the field of philosophy.

Answer:

First, it is still under testing. I tried to do so in my eBook “the second definition”, but it was a fail based on statistics. However, I found the “effects of value system” is uniquely accepted by everyone I talked to and they give really good opinions on it. Releasing value system itself would be like puzzle pieces; failing to understand one concept makes a huge difference. I don’t want people to take on such system with risk yet, but surely other way around the effects of value system will be riskless, safe, and easier for understanding.

Also, copyright have been a bitch on ideas. Meaning ideas especially philosophy will most likely not protected and I am well aware of that. If I release my value system openly, someone else can basically copy and use it for commercial use or something beyond my control. I don’t want my concept end up in trash because someone out there looked at a tiny part of my system and decided to write a book using the name of value system with incomplete idea of value system. If you ask me if this is really necessary; I will simply answer: expect the exceptions.

Answer:

Darwin will answer the question for me. People are like animals; adapt to their surroundings. Even if 99% of the population died just now, people will still go on. Even if philosophy never existed people will still live on. Right now people gained power of immorality? We still go on adapt to the new system. The difference? Quality of life is the difference; or in value system’s term the “average visible value per person”. But even that is changeable.
People can choose to be ignorant. But at times, ignorance will lead to nothing but a utter defeat. To most of the people, they will live fine without any philosophical drive as they are enjoying their life. It is only when problems hits them, they will realize their true inner defeat. Some people are like flowers, ignorant of everything, and when temperature changes to be a little cold? They die off. While some people are like "walls/diamonds", not affected by any changes.
Other than that, problems can be manually artificially created. Right now there are many psychological methods that can crush a person's mental health (in which they are classified topics), although, it is unlikely to be used just on anyone, it is still something people might want more understanding of, before getting themselves trapped.

Answer:

No. But value system is the most powerful system among all of my findings so far; to humanity. I have other concepts that aren’t yet a system; they are like unfinished puzzle pieces, or drawing dot that I am unable to find the pattern. Some of them is just flawless concepts that doesn’t solve anything other than just understanding.
Okay, 2014 update to this question that value system is no longer the most powerful system as it was changed in 2013.

Answer:

No. I found this to be a hilarious when people say they discovered the concept of whole universe seriously or they are just trolling. Universe is infinite because its size is well beyond what human can determine, therefore it unlocks the need of declaring it to be infinite. Again, unlocking the infinite would flaw all existing concept without any exception (further details on other pages). Also people who say they know such thing, never even went to space and beyond; it means they are copying from pre-existing work of others for most of their concept anyways. I am well aware of mentally sick patients tend to declare such concept, so please don’t send me personal info along with any concept like this.
In another sense: All of it are theories. But theories can become something even greater than law when it have actual greater usage. Always ask yourself whether or not if it can help humanity in a great and significant direction before publicly announce anything.

Answer:

I don’t like to prove something that is so obvious, but I will answer it for people who are slow at understanding because in the field of philosophy it does matter to know. I am mentally functional at least medically proven; I even visited few psychologists about my current concept and its viability. I will share something very personally; my father is one of the people who say they found the concept of the whole universe… He has been working on this topic for 12 years dedicatedly. He is financed by his past business success if you asked. But sadly, I hate to say this. But his work is all nulled. He declares the concept of universe to be in 21 Chinese words, which I personally flawed the first sentence thru science proven facts from published science articles and I never even cared to look at second sentence which is even more flawed. My father never tried to unflaw what is declared to be flawed in fact. That is when I found the existing illusion concept that sucks a person in, telling them that their concept is flawless in their own point of view, fooling them to fail. It also serves as a reason why current philosophies as in fact “crap”. You will have to know that I am beyond prepared for this type of problems as like my I am vaccinated to the problem my father is having. I am creating this exception in the field of philosophy given the fact there is no acknowledge of flawless concept in the past.

Answer:

I will only share few potential. First I will be talking about understanding. 100% flawless definition for human action means 100% understanding of human action. 100% understanding means 100% tolerance/acceptance of other people’s action in THEORY. Why? Since you understand the rules for everyone’s action; even your enemies, people you hate. What is the point of hating? You are inside the rule as well, remember? Well, that is proven to be false for me. LOL, that’s because understanding doesn’t mean change, and yet… understanding is a way of change. If you don’t understand what I said I will simplify it in normal English. Systematically I understand how it works thru the definition; however, in real life stereotyping of action like bad people, criminals, murders’ action are considered inferior becomes part of me.
This is one reason this society we are living in isn’t “close to the source” if you know what I meant. And also, I do understand why the society has its stereotyping. More protection? Maybe… More order? Maybe…. I do agree, but there are much better solutions sitting around that I am not going to share. Why not to share? It is simply because I am only a middleman; meaning helping/harming the society does no value change to my value system, so I does none.

Answer:

A point of view of mine would be a card game that people have been playing for a long time; I just joined in a new, after playing for a while I totally lost interest in playing because I keep on losing. Mentally quit on the card game, somewhat generates interest, ideas. Instead of playing cards, I can not to play the card game to win; it is now odd why people play card to win without knowing they can not to play the card game to win for such a long time. Helping or not helping people doesn’t matter since I am already won, people will win one way or another anyways(how are you going to define winning? People can lose and still winning in term of other aspects – philosophy: that people are made to fit into their surroundings just like other animals). For some reason now… Watching others playing the cards is more fun than actually playing it. This is actually one of the reasons why I don’t share value system publically; it makes great changes that you no longer want to play the game (the game isn’t the game of trolling; yes, I do like memes).

Answer:

I am sure you will have this in mind. Answer is obviously no; can you build a car by first looking at it?  Value system consists of different parts from simple to advanced complexity. Simple part would be the math concept, then classification definition, then logical concept (philosophy section’s acceptance), then it gets advanced subject such as redefining existing concepts, identify flawing point of existing concept, “ value systemify” flawed concepts, advanced math value calculation, value system determination. Some of the complexity depends on you such as value system copying, simulate concepts with reasoning, simulate situation with reasoning. It goes on forever… Like adding animal’s value system can be complex even though the basic concept is simple; animals have a simpler value system compare to human.

Answer:

Believe it or not; there is a cure to cancer. But the guy who invented the cure lives in a mountain, isolated from the society. He posted signs everywhere in the mountains, people sees it and ignores the sign as a joke. In return the cure is useless right? *It was an example, don’t take it seriously.* You can help now by spreading this website; specifically this page around. YouTube, Facebook, twitter this crap, talk about it everywhere you go. I mean a concept isn’t that heavy right? Concepts have no weight (obviously no science talk here)… In return I will share more fun concepts; no old boring philosophy. Or else, I will just spread the concept myself when I feel like it is ready.
In term of helping me with research, it isn't possible right now. I work solo, and I don't teach others about the interior of my research to get started. The rules might change in the future, but right now isn't the future yet. Also, I don't work with 3rd party in terms of interior research topics, but there are experimental research been done with the help of 3rd party's support.

Answer:

I have been thinking about this. Matter of fact I and you as the reader should know is the fact: most people rather live on normally, not caring much about life in term of concept. Often time I found people rather watch random funny crap than listening to someone talking about philosophy and that is even the true case for me. I do understand people have different interest (value) toward different things, but on years of gathering information the scale is way off balanced. When it comes to does it all matter question, I will have to repeat the answer. People can live without knowing the system, as long as they are using the system just fine. That is the case for value system; since there is no other philosophy like this; I had to make this definition for that reason. Example would be you love your parents, you get the benefits of it, you think you know what it all means; you are using love. Not understanding love in source. Everything works the same. So you answer rest of the question now.

Answer:

I talked about this benefit from value system, and I answered it briefly. What does it mean in more detailed example? In my eyes, looking at a war hero’s story I can clearly determine his value system therefore understanding his human action of what he did. Looking at a mass murderer, looking at what happened, I can determine his value system right away. Looking at a person fucking a tree, I can determine his value system within seconds therefore understanding why he is doing that. This isn’t the “stereotyping” people use. This is a new form of complete understanding thru means of concept. It even works for multiple-exception related cases. In value system there is no such thing as violence, love, gore, friendship, honor, EVERYTHING. Just value and you can use violence, love, gore, etc to classify value for easier understanding. There is nothing in this world from people you are surprised of in term of action.

Answer:

Huh? Ok…. Look, human will change to value system one way or another eventually. Explain the war, the conflicts, and the pain you received. They are mostly caused by human due to the difference in concept (or view in your term, value system in my term). Want the change? Then I will fix the existing crap by flawing what is wrong then replace them with newer concept. Building on top of flawed concept is never going to work.

Answer:

No but with the concept of infinity then answer would be yes. Under value system, you create the concept of God/religion therefore all of the conspiracies are nulled. Conspiracies use something value system defines; that is by means and power of illusive visible value. Illusive visible value is by means of not giving enough information to you; therefore, causing a misunderstood visible value on you that can potentially cause great damage to you temporary or permanently. It is closely related to religion. Also this is part of the reason people should put concept developing as first priority then knowledge the next, because if conspiracies are real, concept is the only thing can save you. That is all I can say about this on FAQ section due to classification.

Answer:

All flawed one way or another, and yet to change the whole stage is just one step further, the change is up to you and it is optional universally like it always have been. Be the developer. Be the exception is just a start.

Answer:

By understanding, by knowing their exception aspects or by just to know their value system. Universally in value system there is no such thing as be on top of a person in concept because everyone follows the same rule and I can write a whole book just about this topic or any other topic. But that is all I am going to say in FAQ.

Answer:

Define.

Answer:

Define then be flawed by me or the exceptions. To be honest, I dislike talking about God/religion; I am just talking about it because you guys are interested.

Answer:

Either flawed or flawless. However, this no longer applies under current situation. So I modified it to a scale of complete factors. Meaning the more you understand other’s value system, the higher the score goes. Grading people’s mind/concept is never needed, because there is no point of doing so unless you are going to use it on a competition maybe.

Answer:

Yes, it is true as for traditional concepts, where everything is easy to be figured out without much of training or definition. If the meaning of life is so easily to be learned/taught, it would be pointless to even have it; just because it is an impossible question to answer that is what making it unique. I highly doubt anyone can figure out value system without my definitions due to the fact it have been over thousands of years and human still couldn’t fully understand it completely as a system, again. Also it is impossible to have the same exactly copy of definition.

Answer:

Feel it yourself is the best answer. From my answers, can you feel its existence even though I never talk about it as a whole system so far? I get this question asked often, it is true that there are many other similar concepts out there claiming to be flawless; but is it the same for value system? Answer is of course no. But again, it is up to you to feel it. Remember, I am only a middleman of value system; I am here to provide answer if deeply requested and acceptable. There will not be books sold about value system from me; the original founder, no advertisement will be made over value system. However, you will understand the system if you are eager to have it.

Answer:

Stay with science on this question or you can define your own concept with value system that would empower you. Stay with religions that aren’t related with value system would leave you holes in your concept as you are just a user of that flawed concept, the developer never cares.

Answer:

It is true that I am considered as the developer of value system and if you learned it from me then you will become a user. Hate to say this, but value system seemingly to be the same as private companies; always leaving the most advanced knowledge to themselves then sell the secondary knowledge to others. However, it isn’t fully truly when talking about value system because everything a user needs to know is the basics of value system, in order to define action. The deeper you go, the more confusing, detailed it gets so end up it isn’t really a bad thing.

Answer:

You can’t, unless you can revive from the dead. I do have ways to prevent death from nulling your value system, but it is currently not fully supported by science at the moment (no sci-fi crap of course). There are also currently available ways, such as nulling your value system temporary or permanently before death nulls it. Such as: medicine or sickness that messes with consciousness or mental functions, never gained any value or having 0 value or negative value, etc. Nulling your value system by means of death is painful determined by means of current-before death value system’s positive value, the more positive value you have at that moment; the more painful you die. Oh yea, if you are saddened by this question/answer, I am sorry; value system ignores feeling like that, just like what science did. Another way to prevent death from nulling your value system is to become middleman, you already beat the game; knowing pain/death gives negative value or going to null your value system, but who cares when you can easily reconstruct everything back if needed?

Answer:

No. There is infinite number of definition that is impossible to talk about all of them without understanding of value system of your own. However, I’m still talking about definitions since they are probably useful to you.

Answer:

Let’s put it this way. Even when I’m listening to music… I think about it, connect it with value system. Click below to listen to one of hundreds of song I random listen to that I find connection with, LOL. This isn’t insanity; this is really dedication if you ask. Also, I don’t own the song and using this song for educational non-profit purposes under fair use provision of copyright law. Don’t get the song? Convert “baby” in this song to value system. That is how extreme I am. Disregarding value system isn’t the only philosophy concept I developed, I like it the most, currently.

Answer:

That’s true. Remember the meaning of academy. Discovery of unique concepts, ideas is always greater than copying (or learning if you prefer) other people’s discoveries in school. I do accept school as a form of learning process that improves my discovery but it is no longer true when I am certain in the field of philosophy or psychology there is no more topics to cover that relates to value system. Think about it, I spent over two years + on a single unique subject making the lead while others are stuck at the concept of values and never gotten any deeper.

Answer:

I was inspired to beat the game, it was pure self-interest nothing else. Some people can call me “forever alone” that is obviously not true, because once you learned value system you will found out that being “individualized” is very powerful; in concept development so far. Also, I highly doubt there will be a person that shares the same interest that can actually help me with value system.

Answer:

Nothing, same like the game MLP RPG I developed; except downloading, you now have to work for it like a class you take in school. Actually, I have been thinking if value system in the future would be approved to be an academy subject that you can teach in class, it is a shortcut to most advanced philosophy and psychology out there, much better than theories you learn in class while even value system currently is considered as a theory but it is really facts.

Answer:

Value system is a combination of concepts that act as one single system. As a start, everyone would learn about individual concepts and unique definitions. Same like science; it gets deeper as you improve. There are many theories that people have to figure out about value system. Example would be value system’s existence for non-human living organism with deep reasoning and proof; it is simulated to be true, but more proof and reasoning needs to be added. There are many theories like this, that is simulated to be solved, but needs to be proved. For those who don’t know about me, you will have to accept the fact I am not a crazy philosopher that walks around talk crap without deep reasoning and proves; I believe in science and I believe the exception will be made in the field of philosophy.

Answer:

To be honest, there is not much of difference. The only difference between a normal person and a professional philosopher is there in depth exception handling skills. An average person’s mind is full of maybe, this could work, this probably is what life is about with little reasoning and couldn’t handle exceptions. Even 7 years old can learn from value system that everyone’s action is based on values, and that would be the ground level of value system. Yes that one single sentence. Soon, they will realize that they have shit loads of questions and doubts in their mind about exceptions. And that is when I kicks in and solve that problem for you. The skeleton of value system might seems to be ground breaking concept already, but wait until you go deeper where you discover the unknown or the impossible, the knowledge of such source in depth, able to handle very single exception, able to make extreme precise definitions within seconds that the usage of language would be the only element that abstracts your concept. In statics you will realize that 100 people’s opinion means 95% of the whole population’s opinion. Takes at least 1000 people to make the accuracy to 97%, then number of people needed to increase the accuracy rapidly increases until it reach infinite and it would be 99.99 with infinite amount of 9 percent and it is still not perfection. Now apply this to your philosophy, and that 0.0001% is what’s matters.

Answer:

System philosophy is a known theory that allows cooperation of philosophy ideas or complex concepts into a system of philosophy that does something. That something, is incalculable. What is interesting about system philosophy is the fact philosophy on top of philosophy doesn’t limit each other like it is on paper, but instead it expands.

Answer:

My philosophy is only 10% original and 90% copied. All I did is something called exception handling. A horrible, literally stupidest philosophy can gain be still be liked by the population. And a seemingly flawless philosophy can be 90-95% agreed upon. Mine philosophy, is just simply make it 100%. If you take statics you will realize that 95% to 100%’s difference is enormous, in fact infinitely harder. My philosophy can be values with some little twist, calculation methods, then flawless exception handling capabilities. My philosophy can be survival of the fittest, people’s action were approved in order to survive, add little twist and exception handling and it would become value system. People’s action are rational, for this philosophy all you need is flawless exception handling then it would become value system. Value system itself as sometimes I talks about, is not philosophy nor psychology or ideology or anything. It is just exception handling method. And this method can be science, psychology, philosophy.

Answer:

Again, logically yea... Value system and psychology is kind of connected in a way they both working on to define action. The problem I don't want to join psychology is because of system incompatibility issue. Psychology applies a lot of point of view and declaration based ideas, which is something I despite of. Psychology in a sense can solve problems fasters with generalization process that it initially provided within the subject itself. However, it ignores many other elements and exception handling. Meaning psychology can solve problem fast, generalized, seemingly to cover common situations. But in depth, they are extremely fragile when comes to real exception or singularity (my definition). Most of the psychologists never even experienced true exception nor they understand what is exception, how to define or process exception. The subject itself lacks precise calculation and simulation topics. Even value system is lowered in precision when I first starting to use math variables, and in comparison… psychology got none, which make me wonder the subject itself is just more like a mental generalization study. When it comes to news such as a mass murderer, psychology assumes the murderer. Like he/she killed 99 people just because he was depressed and hates people. While value system provides precise calculation on how, which weapon, when, under what situation, adding math, science, and biology, to get a precise or in theory perfect explanation on his action. Only limitation is variables. Just simply variables. More precise your variable, more perfect it becomes. Psychology surely wins in time without doubts, because any psychologist can say fucking generalized crap within a fucking 1 second when comes to cases like this. They fucking ignores exceptions nor want to give a crap about it. Want to something more fucking hilarious? Psychology focuses on understanding action of others. That is just fucking great. Because when you say understanding action of others, how the fucking shit are you going to get fucking variables? Magic variables out of nowhere? You can’t fucking backtrack action to variables like 5 = 2+3. What about 1+4? 0.000001+4.99999..? Fuck. Every time I think about this crap, it make me rage….. On how ignorant people are…. Toward understanding of themselves. In exact detail, value system wasn’t designed to understand action of others because it is just only 99.999999% perfect because there is no fucking way currently to get exact variable of others, other than cheating the way out of it which is sci-fi or classified but achievable in great cost. However, the key and the only key is for us to understand ourselves 100%. Oh yea… it is pointless to understand others when you understand yourself because once you understand yourself you will realize first, others follow the same rule is just variable left to get. And also, you will realize core philosophy and fucking declarations would ass rape you. I have been thinking. If declaration and core philosophy is going to have a war. Which side is going to win? Declaration kind of include core philosophy….. But wee…. You guys aren’t going to help anyways.

Answer:

There was no goal. Only value, and action was therefore approved. Trust me, there is no value to develop philosophy. Socially, it is stupid because they don't get paid nor gets anything in life. Most of the philosopher are lost in dust... forgotten in time. Rationally, I am retarded for developing value system. Exception had to be made… same as always. And I was there for it.

Answer:

I define difficulty level of philosophy with its exceptional coverage and functionalities. It is obviously a difficulty system I personally made..... there is no official method to calculate difficulty level of a philosophy other than this....

Answer:

I am on my break from philosophy; allowing time compression on my philosophy. After this…. Something interesting will happen. MEANWHILE, I really need someone to IMPRESS me. Because if no one ever impress me in philosophy, I am not even going to RELEASE anything simply because I would be disappointed. I am not here to save your belief, I am here to help you to understand yourself. If no one even try… why would I? :)

Answer:

I am on my break from philosophy; allowing time compression on my philosophy. After this…. Something interesting will happen. MEANWHILE, I really need someone to IMPRESS me. Because if no one ever impress me in philosophy, I am not even going to RELEASE anything simply because I would be disappointed. I am not here to save your belief, I am here to help you to understand yourself. If no one even try… why would I? :)

Answer:

Can you learn math multiplications without the concept of numbers? Understanding value system is like learning the numbers. Exception handling is like an add-on to value system where its application starts to be taking place. The problem is that no one so far impress me by even understanding the numbering concept…. People are ambitious, but it doesn’t help when comes to philosophy. Philosophy sometimes can be something you encounter and handle. Ambition doesn’t help you encounter nor handle anything. Other way around. Personalities like ambition flaws philosophy due to biased concept of the creator. It was once said that the best philosophy would come from a person with no philosophy…. It is kind of true if you think about it.

Answer:

None. Initially, I was ignorant. Then now I am here I am, wondering why the fuck others are more ignorant than whom I used to be. If you want to be a great philosopher. Don’t take other people’s philosophy. You start from the ground. On your own. This is a different kind of game. Well, it only applied to me, I don't know about you.

Answer:

The thing is that….. I am joking around most of the time simply because nothing is serious to me. If you are already starting to be serious about things in your life, then you got some exception handling issue. In another words: the subject of your seriousness, judges your knowledge understanding of the world. So.. I don't act or be serious around me.

Answer:

The thing about philosophy is that.... I never really follow the word's definition. But I believe it is the "study of thinking". Philosophy isn't only for people, and that is something many philosophers forget about. It is study of thinking simply because it is.....? to me at least. On wiki it is the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, esp. when considered as an academic discipline. But look...... there are more to it..... they under estimated philosophy...... One thing about philosophy that you might want to know is that science find out about facts. Philosophy find out about concepts that builds facts; of course, this only applies to the specific classified field of philosophy I am working on... the ones you take in school or from others probably won't have such effect.

Not anymore, simulation and exception handling method replaced the older method. You see…. The only reason I used to do on field research was because I had no idea exception handling was even possible due to the infinite amount of combinations; however, now exception handling isn’t an issue anymore…. Anytime, whenever, simulation is just better. Besides, on field research is too costly, time consuming and at the same time accuracy can never reach perfection. In another words: you are doing on field research to find calculation on exceptions, but it is impossible to calculate exception; you can get 999999999999 testers and get your calculation on exception 99.99% precise, but in the end it is still flawed because of that 0.001%. And sadly, I don’t consider 99.99% accurate/precise philosophy a philosophy, I call it “flawed philosophy”, or rather, a view of point.

Not knowing is like when you press a button; a banana drops on your head and you would eat it, without knowing or thinking about why a banana drops on your head when you press the button; declaration based understanding; bad. Knowing; is when you understand why a banana drops on your head when you press the button; you know the button is connected to a storage in which it would filter out stacks of banana to one single banana, and transport it to your location and happens to know where is your head located at and drop it. It is like math, you can estimate the length of a pencil which is 99.99% correct I guess. But do you have the ability to get its length 100% accurate? No. Because it is physical world, but in mental world; it is possible. That is what makes philosophy so powerful in a sense that it is enabled to solve impossibilities. I am not sure if you can understand the hidden reference in the example.

It is based on behavior study of the way typical people gather value aspects. Because psychology heavily rely on concept of generalization and very minimal amount of exception handling, it is extremely easy to illusionize one’s value system therefore causing a flawed psychology interpretation. Psychology can provide an exception rate formula for which it would fix the problem. However, psychology the study itself have some serious internal concept flaws that the whole thing needs a rewrite in order to fix its problems; like generalization, lacking of precise calculation logarithm for in depth explanation, etc. Meanwhile, value system have safe guard against anti-psychology by simply applying concept of illusive value handling method; meaning even if you tries to trick the system, the system wouldn’t even care simply because it is already included inside the system; action. This is the power of the action definition; it doesn’t get influenced by any direction by the user; it is system controlled law that pretty much handles everything you do. This internal layout made people to be people, rather than plants in which their action is no action….. or if you are in-depth… then I am calling plant’s action to be in “forced passive action system”(I forgot the term I used to use); meaning it doesn’t control its own action, external variable does it nor it knows or have value system.

Behavior study is something everyone knows; something you learn redirected from your gene to survive. Like eating would give you strength, kicking someone in the face would get you in trouble understand certain circumstances…. A lot of declaration based concept, and it isn’t flawless as it seems to be simply because exception messes around with the behavior. But behavior study is much easier comparing to philosophy core studies, that most people wouldn’t even bother going further more in-depth about it. Again, using a flawed concept of behavior study have its weakness; in which similarly to just any other flawed concept, they lack of exception handling and in-depth explanation of the source. To be honest, after all these days and after the discovery of core philosophy…. I could really care for less whether or not people use behavior study or similarly “stereotyping” to live their life or philosophy in-depth study. It is like I am saying I can bring people to heaven, but since people kind of enjoying living in hell and core philosophy kind of don’t give a shit or it is changeable….. I am kind of speechless (learn more about this after I release my book to the public, such as “determination process” which is too long to cover).

I kind of talked about abstractly in above question. But in I will add more clarification. You see, this is based on a link with a value system behavior that happens to happen in human….. When it isn’t something that value system supposed to cover. Example: Most of the people are naturally born with the “given value aspect” for reproduction, food, air, etc. These value aspects are controlling us, and since it isn’t apart of value system because it is too declared to people and some other animals……. I decides to call it behavior study or behavior study enhanced with value system, whichever way you prefers. Actually behavior study is quiet a complicated topic, that in long run can essentially change the fate of humanity if it is CONTROLLABLE and ABUSED. In which means, people can be exploit upon if…… someone else other than me decides knows too much about this field of study. It takes a long time because it seems there is a tendency that most of the “given value aspects” ONLY forms at early stages of life, and it mostly requires physical changes (DNA) to make a change….. But it doesn’t have to be DNA related as if you break your legs….. It is now a given value system that wheelchair now held higher value than before….. This is all I can talk about, which is already enough for you to think about. SIDENOTE: “Given value aspect” isn’t a real term lol…. I just forgot the real term I used in my book, so this is like a placeholder.

Oh. When comes to similar topic. It is the concept of core philosophy that takes over. Nothing matters; people adopt. However, value system or even without value system, there is a cure to wake people up from understanding the world they live in…. that is done by implantation/modification of one’s value system. How to implant or modify one’s value system can be natural cause, or it can be forced. But the forced method is classified as similar to brainwash that you see in sci-fi movies if such exists, except value system is focused on mental rather than physical (medical if you prefer)…. Ultimately, both would work except in value system, you know exactly how it is going to work rather than: it might work. You see….. You guys aren’t getting the idea just by asking this question. What makes a dictatorship country worse than The United States? What makes a sci-fi, perfection world better than The United States? Your answer can be freedom, peace, etc. But core philosophy say you would just adopt. PEOPLE WOULD JUST ADOPT. People in North Korea is just as happy as people in US simply because people’s value system adopts because of the core philosophy. Only a few pre-existing value aspects such as value for food, air, etc. can live on, but the rest of the value aspects are just adoptable. This is part of the reason I don’t want to help anyone or taking side in any of these topics. Telling North Korea about how good it is in US isn’t going to make them change their mind just like that. This is the part of what makes value system so powerful, we explain why your method failed and provide a way to change their mind about their own country in a 100% success rate; only if given enough variable. But again, this is classified information because I am not going to take side… cough hint: visible value is the key, but visible value is at the same time illusive value. But you can always find the answer yourself. Also, I am kind of tired of handling out my research knowing that people wouldn’t get anywhere it…. other than fucking shit up.

When you try to invent new concept… you are looking at you, yourself…. Creating SOMETHING THAT OVER THOUSANDS YEARS OLD, THAT NOT ANOTHER PERSON NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT IT AND THERE ARE BILLIONS OF PEOPLE; that is extremely hard to find, furthermore rare when that concepts that is flawless. Which, currently there is only one that I am aware of and currently available in public. Even value system is virtualized complex concept that I put the sense into it… it is still extremely difficult to create/find. Try it: put something like hamburger into a complex system, explain and put usage behind it. Also, there is no easy major or research topics….. Every single field of study can be extremely hard if you go into details. Even if you study rocks, you can go so far into it… color, weight, chemical compositions, gravity, history behind the rock, where it was born and when it was born, taste, what sound does it make and why it make such sound, how chemical form of this rock make it unique, would the rock kill if dropped on someone’s head, how to pet the rock…. Etc.
Oh yea, I forgot to say I do agree that philosophy major is fucked up. They teach concepts that 3 years old can understand; you know, people aren’t that unique in philosophy….. Things often time collapse. But to most of you think there are loads philosophy in our society…. But to me, people’s philosophy are just like one single type… too simple and easy to understand, 0 difficulty level. Why? Oh, my philosophy is the philosophy that eats all other philosophy because it is the source. If I’m lucky one day and become successful, when you take philosophy class….. You will only learn about ONE single philosophy, and that philosophy would pack enough rules to cover every single person. It isn’t science fiction because it was already possible with value system.
Side note: No, I am still not going to major in philosophy no matter what. I hate it. But it would be funny if I do major in it…. As a philosophy majored student who knows more about computer than 99% of computer science students.

Concept is something everyone knows, even if someone doesn’t know… he/she can easily learn from others or just Google about it. Complex concept is different; it doesn’t exist, but it now exists because I defined it to exist. A powerful definition that created a system to become a LAW, a law of action for value system; the complex concept or system philosophy as I call it. I classify concept mostly because it is experimental and it could potentially lead to flaws within the concept itself and many other reasons that would take me hours to explain…. When government classify a weapon for example, if it is leaked the government can easily track it and get the weapon back. However, when comes to concept it is very different. If one copy were distributed to a person, he/she can transfer the copy to another with no effort at all. A classified concept can become a common concept that everyone knows within few days to hundreds of years.
I know the value of my research. I designed hundreds to thousands of concepts over the years of research ranging from philosophy to psychology to behavior study to statistics. Quite a few of my research can make a hit once it is released. However, they aren’t ready for release nor it will. Value system is the only concept that I decides to share publically because it was designed for human, and quite frankly, I am just giving the source back to where it belongs.
Classified concept potentially held high destruction rate if it is at its in-depth field of research... and worse if it is used by someone who tries to exploit certain aspect of the concept trying to make a profit given no understanding of required concepts. Value system IF given to public right now….. Trust me…. Some people will gain action allowance from it, using it to achieve action in crime and etc. If you are a murderer for example….. Without value system, you are like a person on a chain without understanding that you are even locked from many of your action. However, with value system….. The rules changes in an unchanging way as I said before. But the thing is that: I don’t think people will ever get in depth of value system without me; yes, it is a very serious challenge ever since I got started in this field.
Classified concept is optionally added by me, personally because as a middleman, I don’t really care if people die or happy. In the end, it benefits you if I rather lock it than to release it unprepared for.
Enough said lol, it is hard for me to say much about it, just because it is the way it is.

Yea…. No. My philosophy isn’t connected to computer AT ALL, or at least they aren’t connected in any core direction. As you might already read of, I am interested in computer because coming to America really fucked my life in a negative shitty way that computer was and is still something I spent most of my time on; because in US life is really boring, not much of going on. Using computer does help in philosophy in a sense that it allows you to communicate and understand others, but at the same time you loses elements that you gets when you socialize face to face with others in real life.

30 minutes. 30 minutes is about the time it takes for me to type everything out to share on my website. It used to be few hours per day because I used every single piece of free time I get back in my high school to write philosophy.... And it was like that for few years until value system was completed. Then after high school.... Instead of writing books about philosophy I'm starting to remember all of the concepts rather than typing or writing them down. Words like "infinite" that I use as philosophy shortcut can instantly lead to millions of ideas I already have in mind about that specific term; they are like keywords that awakens your memory about that specific branch of system philosophy.
Also, don't get me wrong. 30 minutes is just the time I use 100% on philosophy. I multitask A LOT. Doing one thing at a time bores me. I think about philosophy everyday 24/7 none-stop that even includes when I am sleeping when I happens to have dreams. I think about philosophy when I brush my teeth, driving, playing, in school, in class, etc. And NO, it does NOT decrease my efficiency and focus if you are trained over the years.

Uhh….. Me watching and liking a show doesn’t mean anything. It isn’t related to my philosophy or anything, it is just my bored-ness. Quite frankly, computer and philosophy research isn’t everything I do; most of the people gets the idea that I design games, design website, research philosophy just because I put them online, but my focus is still mainly philosophy then computer…... I am actually interested/experienced in many field of study. Example would be I am really dedicated at computer aided design, one of my side task dream is to 3D print stuff that I design. That’s just one of hundreds of my interests, and you don’t have to know all of them.
You know what’s funny? There are always about 5% of the people would stereotyping that I’m stupid or something because I like watching cartoon. I took animation classes, I design my own animation, it is just personal interests to like and enjoy a cartoon. For people who doesn't know... I do digital art as well. There are just too many things you don't know.

There are some ugly truth that I don't want to talk too much about. Those are black dots of the past remains in my early life's memories. So much positive and negative influences altogether that could potentially make me a criminal or a hero, and yet, I didn't took any of the extreme path.
Academically, for me, before 2010 was dark. My GPA for freshman year was 1.8 when I failed most of my classes. Same for sophomore and first semester of junior year. But of course, I was always excellent in computer. There was no way for me to get into college. In most of the educator's eyes, nothing will happen to me and I will end up failing everything in life. There is no fucking way a F student and become a A student like that. Long term habits, lack of motive, just wouldn't make it a easy task.
It end up all changing around since second semester of my junior year. I still lacked motivation for academic subjects but I managed to get 3.0 + GPA, and it happens to be the year I started to write books on system philosophy. Then 3.5+ for my senior year. I made it into university, and continued to have 3.5+ GPA. I never cared too much about academy study because I am biased towards unique information that matters and benefits my life in great deal.
I believe philosophical thinking builds up your critical thinking significantly and it just makes everything easier when you can pierce the thought of everything that is human capable. Just that alone, makes academic process less murky and more clear.... More clear as in relative correlation with others.
I have been asked if I will ever try for a well known university to make up for my horrible GPA back in high school due to early failures. But I personally found it rather stupid for people to think higher education will benefit you more. There are many people around me, well, at least 3 people that are close to me... Who did horrible in high school, go to community college and try hard to get 3.9 around GPA, end up transferring into the best universities. Just what the fuck the system is this? I will simply NOT going thru all of the process that proves nothing but cancer within the society who think of university-superiority. It is actually one of my side tasks to teach people how to judge based on preciseional data rather than stereotyping.
In the end, summary. I think it takes many elements to make one better in academy thru philosophy research. It is unproven scientifically and I will never waste my time to do a research to prove it. This case applied to me, and I obviously have the grade reports to show the change, but I don't know if it will hold effect for others. That's that. I guess it changed my life in society's eyes.

Answer:

The biggest answer is actually system philosophy itself, I research on system philosophy for system philosophy (I know it doesn't make sense). But it is 50% personal interest and trust within this field. I truly believe system philosophy is revolutionary, and even myself is a living example in terms of philosophically thinking. Times before I discovered the first system philosophy, value system, I had this belief: Every step I take is just another step someone else have to catch up to me, if I max out the capability of human's thinking potential, even if the result is a loss, I still win the game, as it is the best you can go. With that belief in mind, I worked on system philosophy day and night without thinking anything about the gain, but about proceeding the steps.
That later changed a bit. Research's result end up to be ground-breaking in many philosophical aspects. I am starting to be interested into releasing findings to the public to improve philosophical thinking of entire society, I got more involved with physical experiments to get philosophy to be applied to actual terms, more ambitions that links me greater to the current reality than a world of my mind.
However, they are always the secondary needs. As often as I have been saying: I already won the game, however, winning the game doesn't mean anything physically; which is the same as even if I know the ultimately secure of the big bang, it still doesn't make a God in this physical world, but we just know it (example). It is really optional for me to do any of the secondary goals, or to do the opposite of the goals if I ever want to. You can think that I am always researching on system philosophy as an interest of answer I am seeking for. But the reality of system philosophy is: Once a system philosophy's system and its source is created, it would be completed at 100% scale. It is like math, where you know the concept of addition 1+1=2, the rest of 2.2332 + 525.333213= ? is just depths that can be easily generated based on the original concept.
My primary goal is to fulfil my own desire of understanding, it is the only goal that cannot be influenced even if the world fights against me, I will still win against the world with logical, philosophical, reasoning. Which itself, is a benefit orientated from system philosophy's exception handler. My secondary goal is to give others a desire for understanding, and a path to fulfil their desire for understanding. The secondary goal isn't a goal that I can succeed even if I try. Even if every word I say, every step I take is perfect.... I can still fail. It is like even if suddenly everyone on the planet starts to be caring for system philosophy, but an step of unavoidable outcome such as my death (which is possible), guess what? My secondary goal still won't be finished, even if all of the steps I can possibly take is perfection.

There are consequences when people take system philosophy as their own work. The conequences is often times ended up as conceptual errors where your vision of system philosophy is messy at finest, confusing at common. System philosophy is based on precisional pointers, blurry focus would lead to flaws. The blur cannot be fixed without system philosophy's main branch; which is ultimately a paradox of its own. The part that acts as the bigbang of all of the system philosophies. I don't share any core information on system philosophy's main branch to shut down the spread at its neckpoint, it is intended to prevent people from creating new sub-branch of system philosophy unauthorized by me. I did countless risk analysis, always. I am always way beyond your imagination. I think the best ideology applies here is: Do not look at current concepts I am sharing with you as of it is everything. There are much more to be seen, enough to make even God himself to wonder into what's ahead indefinitely.