What is the problem with me?

• What is the problem with my country of origin?
  The problem is that it has multiple subsets, with different membership functions that tend to be conflicting in essence, with no, broken or weak membership function to the original super-set (the country itself).
  Each subset has another sub-subsets, one for each member, and for each one there exists a different membership function that acts based on the set’s own utility function that serves an innate belief (that acts as a goal at the same time) that the member(s) of this set (sub-subset in this case) is ‘higher’, more important, more powerful, more authoritative than other existing members of other sets.
• What is the problem of my country of residence?
  The problem is that it has been built on basis different than the general basis of universal laws, such as: input–>process–>output that can be used in explaining the reasons of prosperous nations (in the following sense: that this prosper is the outcome of the efforts and hard work of this nation’s people) where also the element of time plays a role. In this country, where I live, the output is that this country is really so rich, the input was that other minds (of different lands) had discovered the use of natural elements such as oil and gas, and some people (of different lands) had discovered these elements in this land, and the element of time was missing in this process. thus, in a very short time, a whole generation become so rich, with no subconscious alarm that would indicate that these resources are actually finite as time goes on (thus no sense of time, no hard work, no planning), and no function of correspondence that would link this outcome to the real causes of human mind’s long record of discovering the earth, and thus no trigger of true respect to other nations (especially developing nations) and of true appreciation of science.
  A wind of change, however, began to blow with the vision of sheikh Mohamed bin Rashid.
• What is the problem of my religion?
  The problem is that it conflicts with the universal laws that our minds are inclined to follow. It enforces us to believe (and testify it) the credibility of the claims of another human-being where these claims are un-measurable, un-testable, not universally general (can’t be applied to any human, anywhere and at anytime), and un-negotiable, in-flexible (they build one single model and claim it is the one. Moreover, this model didn’t come by any of the natural ways we are used to, such as, the build-up way, the research-based way, the discovery way, the evolutionary way).

Seems I am full of problems!!