Perfection

[Keeblergiant]

What is perfection? How does one define it? Can a jealous person be perfect? Can a fearful person be perfect?

[marglarg]

I think it is akin to beauty, and thus open to the individuals' own interpretation. That is, it's different depending on who you ask ... but for me - good people, good drink and good music ... aaaahhh .. perfect :wine:

[Keeblergiant]

I think it is akin to beauty, and thus open to the individuals' own interpretation.

Ahh, you've nailed my feelings exactly. Does anyone think that perfection has an absolute? If so, is there an example?

[dutchie]

There is no such thing as perfection when referring to human beings. A flower is perfect. Human perfection is strictly under cultural interpretation. When talking about the exterior, I'd prefer Miss Holland over Miss China. Talking about the interior, I could not say what perfection means..

Perfection does not have a pleasant ring to me. Imperfection can be pleasing. A few weeks ago I heard a "perfect" performance of a violin concert by a Japanese violinist. She did not make a single mistake, yet I experienced the performance as being a bit "clinical", and lacking in emotion, holy fire and sparkle. On the other hand, I once saw a performace by Itzhak Perlman that really moved me. The sheer emotion, the energy... Who cares if there were a few "imperfections"...

Now which performance was "perfect"?

[Edge]

Perfection is nothingness because it is only in that state can something have no flaws because it doesn't exist.

[Keeblergiant]

Perfection is nothingness because it is only in that state can something have no flaws because it doesn't exist.

You're missing the point. Flaw is a relative term. I may call something a flaw, but you may call it perfection.

However, are there any creationists out there with an idea or two?

[ALIENTheorist]

my definition of perfect is something which is exactly what you want it to be, meaning imperfect like a concert which had a few mistakes, or a concert with no mistakes. Perfect is just another word for what we want in this world.

[RavenWhitefang]

Ahh, you've nailed my feelings exactly. Does anyone think that perfection has an absolute? If so, is there an example?

Im in no way a mathmatician, or a scientist, but this person seems to believe that THIS (http://www.cojoweb.com/phi.html) is what constitutes as perfection. And this researcher HERE (http://www.beautyanalysis.com/mba_facevariationsbysex_page.htm) shows what this perfect face the PHI face looks like.

As far as my own interpretation of perfection, it is something that gives the person experiencing a total feeling of satisfaction. When someone sees or feels something perfect to them, the feeling is so strong it just shatters them and brings them to the brink of tears at how perfect it is. Much like the pics that dutchie and I have been posting HERE (http://forums.armageddononline.org/showthread.php?t=3446) of the galaxy.

[Edge]

You're missing the point. Flaw is a relative term. I may call something a flaw, but you may call it perfection.

However, are there any creationists out there with an idea or two?


I have a more longwinded version of my oringinal statement from a couple of years ago, in it I give a definition of flaws and different types of flaws (possible and actual, from memory that is what I called them). Its also more an attack on the idea that there is a single perfect being in existance.

It may be a bit hard to read because I did write when I was fourteen so the english used isn't the best around.

[dutchie]

When I read these posts, I see that most members have less of a problem using the word "flaw" than they have with "perfect".

I think it's imperative to acknowledge that both are mirror images of the same thing and are thus in effect non-existent. One might say that (when a=2 and b =2) a - b = 0 is a perfect equasion, but substitute these variables with cows and ducks and it's already "flawed".. So IMO perfection is ALWAYS a measure flawed by subjectivity - and so is.. ehr.. "flaw" flawed..

I need a drink... :alcoholic

[Keeblergiant]

I have a more longwinded version of my oringinal statement from a couple of years ago, in it I give a definition of flaws and different types of flaws

A flaw to you is not a flaw to everyone else.

[Edge]

Below is what I wrote ages ago on the topic.


Perfection an ideal that many strive for in today’s commercial world. However the term “perfect” has been watered down and lost is it ever was really defined. For the term perfect used to mean that an object was perfect if it had no flaws, thus making it the most suitable object for the task at hand under any circumstances. This however has never fully defined what perfection truly is because throughout history has there ever been anything that was perfect? For this often complex term is often hard to comprehend even after the massive amount of watering down society has placed upon its meaning. In order for us to understand true perfection we must first look at the following ideas: opinions, perfection, flaws, potential flaws, nothingness and true perfection.

It is rare today for someone to think of perfection for what it truly is. Simply because many associate perfection with a bottle of wine, a piece of music, a person or a sporting team, either way it is based upon the opinion of the individual and not on its true merits. Why because for something to be perfect it must have no flaws, something which when it is based on an opinion is impossible to come across because opinions contradict. This quite simply is because there are six billion odd different opinions or views on this planet alone regardless of how well founded they may be there will always be conflict between at least two main groups. The positive and the negative, yes just like in a debate there will be disagreement over various facets of the subject. And even if both sides come to a conclusion that is the same there will always be the views of those who did not debate over the topic. Hence why anything opinion based is fundamentally flawed and thus is not perfect. This however is only one type of flaw; there are many ways for something to be flawed, which breaks down into two main types: potential and existing.

Flaws are apart of life, because without them we would not advance, we would not improve nor would we go backwards. A process by which things change would not happen at all if indeed everything was flawless and perfect. As I stated before flaws break down into two main types; potential and existing. Flaws of both types are defects like all flaws, these only differ as their names suggest in the time frame they occur in. An example of this is someone placing sand in the petrol tank of a car. In this example there are a number of different flaws, we will only look at four of these.

1. The potential flaw of sand being placed in the petrol tank

2. The existing flaw of sand being placed in the petrol tank

3. The existing flaw of the car engine being unable to work with sediment in the petrol

4. The existing flaw of the car being able to prevent this situation from happening

Thus Potential Flaws are flaws that have not happened or come into existence but still have a possibility of existing and effecting an object, theory or person. Existing Flaws however are flaws which already affect the performance of an object, theory or person. Flaws in theories are mainly potential because theories are put forward to the individual who may misinterpret the theory and use it incorrectly. This can be seen in mathematical formula such as y = mx + c and in the form of scientific theories such as the Theory of Evolution. All these brilliantly thought out and accurate theories can be and have been misused throughout our history with varying results, through a lack of understanding by persons at almost all levels of power. For surely no one can grasp every idea perfectly even if it is as simple as nothingness.

It is clear that as long as there is something there will be flaws and a lack of perfection. However if there was nothing, there would be no flaws and thus there would be perfection something which puts meaning to the phrase “nothing is perfect”. To understand this, we need to understand what nothing or nothingness is. An idea in its self that is often misunderstood and difficult to comprehend because nothing is unlike anything any of us has ever know it is almost inconceivable because nothing is doesn’t exist like anything else does in our world. This is because nothing means no atoms, no space, no time, no people, any trees or planets anything that is something would not be there because it would not exist. Meaning that there wouldn’t be anything there to be flawed, making nothing perfect.

This theory when it is broken down into the very basics forms six points.

1. Perfection means to have no possible flaws

2 Flaws can influence ideas, actions and events

3. Living is not required to be perfect, in fact living is flawed in many ways because it allows other things to influence or affect the living thing and other inorganic material.

3. Everything in existence has flaws

4. Therefore in order to be perfect it* must not exist i.e. be nothing

5. Nothing means no atoms, ideas, emotions, form or anything that can classify it as something.

6. Therefore everything that we know is flawed because it can be twisted, misused, misunderstood and in general be affected by us or other forces.

*whatever the subject is e.g. a rock, a person, a god, a spirit, an idea.

[Strife]

I'll take the time to look at the previous posts in a second but first I'll give my own opinion.

Plain and simple from the knowledge that I have, perfection is imaginable, but unattainable. Even if perfection were given I assume we would get tired of such a thing.

[Keeblergiant]

Edge: You seem to be talking about unanimous perfection. If that's the case, then I agree with you; perfection doesn't exist. However, I do believe perfection can be achieved individually.

[SIXshotsONEheart]

5. Nothing means no atoms, ideas, emotions, form or anything that can classify it as something.

well that statement in itself is contradictory, because "nothing," is an idea that means an absense of something, which is merely and idea because it is intangible. Therefore to have nothing, is to really have an absense of something. which, sorry to say is something

[DontBeAfraid]

nothing is also having no absense..... Its an impossible concept for humans...... Much like infinity.

[Keeblergiant]

nothing is also having no absense..... Its an impossible concept for humans...... Much like infinity.

To have no absense would mean that you have something.

[DontBeAfraid]

Like I said, its an impossible concept for us.

[Dead Man Walking]

Perfection is akin to Reality. The latter is an interpretation of the individual experience. The former is a perception of the desire to achieve absolute purity in form and presence. If the reality is perceived as being one of a perfect nature by the one that is experiencing the moment, then the perfection is achieved by the individual within that singular point in time. No one would be able to convince the one that experienced the moment that their experience was not perfection. In circles of debate one could argue that perfection is an interpretation of the examiner of the subject or object in question, yet if the perception by someone, views the issue as something or someone that is perfect, the opposing view becomes moot to the one that has had the experience. In that reality, the moment was perfect.. :schizo:

[SIXshotsONEheart]

Perfection is akin to Reality. The latter is an interpretation of the individual experience. The former is a perception of the desire to achieve absolute purity in form and presence. If the reality is perceived as being one of a perfect nature by the one that is experiencing the moment, then the perfection is achieved by the individual within that singular point in time. No one would be able to convince the one that experienced the moment that their experience was not perfection. In circles of debate one could argue that perfection is an interpretation of the examiner of the subject or object in question, yet if the perception by someone, views the issue as something or someone that is perfect, the opposing view becomes moot to the one that has had the experience. In that reality, the moment was perfect.. :schizo:


in short...


...You seem to be talking about unanimous perfection. If that's the case, then I agree with you; perfection doesn't exist. However, I do believe perfection can be achieved individually.

[Dead Man Walking]

Since when is short better? Is naked better than clothed? Don't we enjoy the exploration of thought? Should our explainations fall to something that leaves a question? Where is the purpose of lingerie if we can't peel the wonder from our imagination? Simplicity is sometimes lost on the unimaginatve, or the less creative of minds. Seems to me that there is no such thing as a direct answer. :smokin:

[Keeblergiant]

Like I said, its an impossible concept for us.

Just saying it's impossible doesn't make it impossible. Can you please explain to me why it's impossible? Because, by definition, the absense of absense implies an existence. The whole contradiction SIXshotsONEheart was pointing out stems from the inclusion of ideas.

[DontBeAfraid]

How long would it take to traverse an infinite amount of space KG?

this is going somewhere so just answer as shortly and accurately as possible

[DontBeAfraid]

I lost my train of thought.... So I will just answer you. Maybe some other day I will explain the infinity thing.

You are looking at it as a switch, where it is either ocupied(sp) space or unocupied(sp) where nothing would usually imply unocupied space but in the case of true nothingness there would not even be any space which is an impossible concept for us to truely envision. We can really only imagine the switch being on or off, as you have just done, we cant imagine 'no switch'. Because nothing AND no space dont work in our universe.

[Keeblergiant]

We can really only imagine the switch being on or off, as you have just done, we cant imagine 'no switch'.

I understood what you were saying, I asked you to explain your reasoning behind this. Why is that how it would be? Once again, these contradictions are the result of the inclusion of ideas...

[Edge]

well that statement in itself is contradictory, because "nothing," is an idea that means an absense of something, which is merely and idea because it is intangible. Therefore to have nothing, is to really have an absense of something. which, sorry to say is something

No not really.

You see I did not state that you would have nothing as such but rather that nothing means that there is absolutly nothing there wether it is a physical body or something like an emotion or idea i.e. no thought, life, ideas, emotions. The idea of 'nothing' could be defined as an absense of something but that in itself is just another way of saying 'nothing'. In reallity its just another label for the same term/idea but one that relayies on there being someone there to witness or define it before it can actually count.

For all of us nothing is an idea, its something theroretical. It doesn't exist because it isn't something and to exist it must be something. Which is why the idea of it exists because an idea is a thing, a something.

The nothing I refer to isn't even a blank space it is just what it is the very idea put into another theory. Basically it takes the idea and combines it with the ideas of flaws and perfection. Which accumlates into my view as to why the statement "nothing is perfect" is correct. Reread what I originally wrote on the subject a few times couple with what I wrote two or so years ago - which, despite the poor wording - is just an elongated version of my original post in this thread.