About racism

First of all racism is a natural derivative of the human brain function, due to affinity. Our brain is trained to spot similarities between things that are close to us, and if those things bring us pleasure they increase the affinity and we consider them as a extension of ourselves. When we have built such an affinity with these patterns, it is natural to be able to spot differences with people that are widely divergent from those familiar to us patterns. This mental separation can manifest into indifference, aversion, snobism or even racism.
You'll notice here that I'm using the word racism with a more gentle connotation that usual, i.e. not implying acts of hatred or severe discrimination. For me, racism as an unavoidable product of our mental processes, is just a strong sense of personal differentiation from others.
Now the question is: does racism exist even today and in what form? Well, as you would imagine the discrimination in casts of humans is still here, mostly because as we said it is an derived from an inherent feature of the human brain. And the way it appears today is in my opinion via the financial capabilities of each individual.
Poor people are considered of lower value than rich people. Life is worth less for these "lower levels of human existence" (I'm being ironic here, of course). They are entitled to less healthcare & welfare and are marginalized from society. If we go a bit upper, to the hard-working but low-paid populace, they are certainly better but still, they are utilized like modern slaves, forced to work day & night and give their lives as cogs to the capitalistic machine. They are comforted with a mobile phone, a remote control and always kept on a leash via a heavy mortgage.
Going even higher on the human scale, we have the self-made business owners & professionals (the upper middle-class). These are now highly regarded because they rose up to the challenge and made a difference. They are considered a higher class on their own, entitled to good private healthcare, and capable to live in spacious, luxurious homes with many comforts of their choosing. They are the envy of the populace and the highest grade one can ever hope to ascend to.
And finally, we have the super-rich, who were born into riches or the extremely few who became billionnaires. They are a class of their own, self-regarded as the rulers of this system. These are the masters of the "slaves" below, heavily dependent on the populace to keep the machine turning and provide them the profits, with little or just normal work. They might have inherited the riches, they might not be smart or capable, but still they consider themselves above all else.

You see, and this is where the system is wrong. Because discrimination and racism exists even today (and we probably cannot avoid as long as we are human), but it's form is twisted. Because we have translated money as a measure of worth and regard the individual depending on the amount of money & assets we has in his bank account.
If the ideal of eradicating racism cannot be achieved, at least we should change its manifestation. We need a better measure of worth than money. Don't get me wrong, I don't totally disagree with the notion that making money is a measure of worth. It definity shows something. An excellent (bright, capable, honest) employee would be paid more than an average employee. This is natural and expected. It is healthy, because it provides an incentive to the excellent employee to keep up his efforts, as well as a motive to the average employee to get better.
But this is a good case of where more money means more worth. There are also many other examples that this paradigm fails. If you inherited the money, it means nothing about your abilities (moreover, it is a counter-incentive to evolve and better yourself). If you stole & cheated to get it, it is also a bad indicator. If you had a better startpoint than most (due to your parents' circle of acquaintances, or their financial support) it is unfair to be compared to equal terms with the rest. So, in the process of making money, there are many other factors expect individual human worth that can tip the scale in your favor or against it, which ultimately makes money a bad factor for differentiation.
And what is a better measure of worth? Well, if it was simple, we would have discovered it. It would be nice to have a way to measure how virtuous a character is, how much is his capabilities, his smarts, his willingness to offer to the public, his potential for evolution. If we had such an objective measure and is also was not only genetically predisposed (i.e. you were not born into a class but you had the capability to change if you wanted to and tried), then I would personally be ok with having some kind of discrimination. If you had the capability to ensure a good level of welfare for all individuals, give them all, an equal starting point and then judge them objectively based on their actual worth and contribution to society, then yes some who excelled should also be rewarded more handsomely that others. This is perfectly normal and it would set a precedent and align the motives of everybody for a better world via personal contribution.
But until we have such a system, racing based on any other measure is just plain wrong.

Just a quick comment about intelligence

Higher levels of intelligence (e.g. those exhibited by humans) are just a product of better pattern matching, in my opinion.
I don't see much different capabilities & algorithms in animals than in humans. And a nice example is love: it is just a higher level of affinity (that is also found in animals) due to better pattern matching!

An attempt to explain extro & intro-version

Everyone wants to be happy in his life, to experience emotions and joy.
And we know from Noesis Theory that emotions are Driving Pockets that occur from out-of-context experiences.
Some people are able to produce original thoughts and out-of-context experiences purely from inside their mind and others need external stimulation to achieve that. Thus it is natural for the latter to be "forced" by their own nature to seek this external stimulation, because this is the only known way for them to experience interesting emotions!
So I would be willing to take a guess, saying that extroversion is a byproduct of the structure of the mind of a portion of individuals and is used as a method to create out-of-context experiences.

A bit more elaboration on the meaning of life

As I have said many times in the past, I believe that the meaning of life is the advancement of organizational complexity.
But a question that can easily be posed is: which type of advancement is good and which is bad? And who should be the judge of that?

It is true that for humans this conundrum has been solved since inception, whereas a race of robots would really have a hard time solving the same question. The answer for humans is of course death. Death prunes all the branches of the tree sooner or later and it is up to humanity to pick the best branches and maintain the knowledge they offered in their lifetime, by writing it in books, teaching it in schools and capitalizing on it in various ways; integrating it in a way in its body of knowledge.
It is certainly sad that the good branches are also pruned at some point in time, but it would be even worse if it was left in the hands of men to decide who will live forever and who should be left to perish. Imagine if this was the case and if by chance Hitler was able to win WW2... We would have been sunk to an eternal Dark Age...

So it's better if every person leaves behind a new piece of complexity (let's think of it as a lego piece) that humanity has to decide whether to stack it upon the other pieces that have been aggregated since the dawn of man, or simply leave it aside. It is a tough decision, because sometimes such a piece may prove unworthy foundation for the pieces above and humanity might have to "backtrack" and tear down a whole piece of the wall, just to be able to put a better piece (of complexity) that can support building a higher "wall".

In the end, the goal is to take the right decisions that help us build the highest possible wall, or in other words advance complexity to the limits that the human mind can support.

Involuntary repositioning on Maslow's pyramid

It is truly difficult for me to deal with Level 5 when the situation close, nearby and around keeps repositioning me back to Level 2...

Nietsche and his epiphanies

It is incredible how accurately Nietsche describes the epiphanies that are coming often to me about my Noesis Theory!! It is truly a wonderful experience!

Something profoundly convulsive…suddenly becomes visible and audible with indescribable definiteness and exactness…There is an ecstasy whose terrific tension is sometimes released by a flood of tears…There is a feeling that one is utterly out of hand…Everything occurs without volition, as if an eruption of freedom, independence, power, and divinity. The spontaneity of the images and similes is most remarkable; one loses all perception of what is imagery and simile; everything offers itself as the most immediate, exact, and simple means of expression.

Simply amazing how unique experiences such as this transcend individuality and manifest in the way across times and minds. And all this because, deep down, deep inside, the brain operates by just one algorithm...

The advantageous flaw of capitalism

The advantageous flaw of capitalism is that it is designed to give people what they want.
And we pretty well all know that giving in and indulging in your desires is not necessarily a good thing.

Yes, I know what you're going to say: but this exactly is the meaning of life according to Noesis Theory (maximization of pleasure)! Why should this be a bad thing?

Well the problem lies into the fact that our brain is constructed in a way to value immediate and more certain pleasure much more than the distant, unsure, more abstract pleasure. Physical things, consumables, sex, here-and-now items will always be preferred by the masses because of their capability for instant pleasure.
Ideals, long-range goals for world peace, better education, higher intellect, etc will be dismissed by the brain if given a choice.

And it is given a choice every minute of your time. For example on how you'll spend your money and your time.  People make these choices for the short-term pleasure and thus shape the demand of the market. Capitalism stirs the corporations into filling in this demand with supply of goods & services that people want and are willing to pay for! If the majority of the populace valued and derived the utmost pleasure from creating a better education system, the corporations would already have provided it, in order to increase their profits!
It's the demand that's the problem, not the supply!!

So my advice would be to stop trying to beat capitalism. It is a system that is very good at providing people what gives them pleasure. And you can't beat that goal, because it is hardwired into your brain.
So don't try to change the supply side of the equation. Change the demand!

It's the people's wants that are flaws. Make them want something better for everybody and capitalism will adapt to provide it. It's as simple as that ;)