|
|
Posted by Mark Parnell on 01/11/07 11:49
Deciding to do something for the good of humanity, Toby Inkster
<usenet200605@tobyinkster.co.uk> declared in alt.html:
> Mark Parnell wrote:
>
>> To judge whether something is perfect, you must have a perfect standard
>> to compare it to.
>
> I think that's a rather useless definition of perfection.
It's certainly not very helpful in practise, no.
> Something that
> is perfect should be judged perfect by all who perceive it.
True. And when you do perceive perfection, you will recognise it as
such. It just might not fit your *current* concept of perfection.
To use your example of this perfect thing that doesn't fit in your box,
you may currently think that to be perfect it has to fit in your box,
but when you actually see it, you will realise that it is perfect,
despite not fitting in your box. As I said before, it's your box (and
your desire that the other thing fit in it) that's not perfect.
--
Mark Parnell
My Usenet is improved; yours could be too:
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|