I have a student who loves the famous line: Practice makes perfect. The funny thing about it is the fact that he added something into it … but nobody is perfect; so, why practice? For him, since perfection is unattainable, there is no point in struggling to achieve perfection owing to the fact that even constant practice still guarantees imperfection. I sort of quizzed myself as to whether or not perfection is achievable/attainable.
When we try to imagine a perfect circle for example, we immediately picture a circular object whose circularity is flawless (no irregularities) ; otherwise, the object is imperfect. A perfect examination means a perfect score. The latter is easy to imagine but to objectively identify the criteria of a perfect circle is obviously a tedious task. One has to be aware of the fact that the human eye does commit error. What may seem to be a perfect circle viewed by a naked eye may not be perfect at all when viewed 100 times larger by a microscope. A perfect line may look like a broken line whenever viewed by a microscopic eye, say of an eagle. (I haven’t been an eagle. At least as far as I know.)
Thus said, is it still possible for us to talk about perfection? The Online Dictionary defines the word perfect as something which is entirely without any flaws, defects, or shortcomings. But is there such a thing as perfect in a world where everything seems to possess flaws and shortcomings? Try to share the qualities of your perfect girl and everybody would say… in your dreams man.
Amidst the elusive objective existence of something which is perfect, does perfection exist? If a circle is perfectly circular and it does not exist, is it really perfect or simply near-perfect?
Existence here means spatio-temporal existence. Whew.
There are perfect ideas and there are imperfect presentations of ideas. The former refers to a mere existence in one’s mind and the latter refers to spatio-temporal existence.
Is it more logical or acceptable to say that spatio-temporal existence evidently shows the imperfection of something which used to be perfect? Perfect girlfriends are all perfect in mind but not until one lives with that ideal-perfect girl.
Watchatink? Ahhhh! Nosebleed. How about when we try to imagine a perfect fiasco, perfect poor, or perfect ugly?
Let me save myself now because no matter how I try to swim, I feel like I’m about to drown. It seems that the concept of perfection which is a product of the limited brain of a limited human being is not at all perfect. Every effort to assert the concept of a perfect something failed since it possesses a limited quality which is within the bounds of a limited human brain.
The concept of perfection by which many people are exposed seems to be beyond comprehension and beyond description. The moment we define the word perfect, the definition by itself limits the concept of perfection. Or should I say that whenever we say that something is perfect, what we actually mean is that it is perfect according to the point of view of an imperfect human being.
Who decides whether something is perfect or not?
Dogs see the world the way they see it simply because they are constructed the way they are. With their anatomical make-up, it is but logical to think that they see the world in a wholly different manner the way we (humans) see the world. Of course, gold fishes see the world in an extremely different manner. Bats see the world upside down and I would like to believe that their inverted position of viewing the world simply shows a different reality. Who decides what constitutes perfection?
Please wake me up and tell me. If you are having a hard time waking me up, please hit me using my pillows but please don’t ask me whether or not I’m asleep because I am. ;-)
No comments:
Post a Comment