ilya_shambat2004@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Much of the Western thought centers itself around the idea that
people
> are imperfect. Out of that conclusion, people say such things as
"there
> cannot be a perfect culture" or "there cannot be a perfect knowledge"
> or "there cannot be a perfect society."
>
> My question: What do you mean by "perfect"?
>
> It may seem like a shock, but different cultures have different ideas
> of what makes for perfection. The Christians consider perfection to
be
> a matter of being Christ-like - a state that they believe nobody can
> attain, but that is the key to eternal paradise through Jesus. The
> Hindus and Buddhists consider perfection to be a matter of ridding
> one's soul of all bad karma and the desires that they view to be
> impure, and of finding one's way into a place of complete love and
> compassion, in order to attain liberation and merger into the divine.
> The Muslims consider perfection to be a matter of following sharia;
the
> Jews, of following the Commandments; the Con****ians, of fitting in
> perfectly with the deified social order; the Taoists, of ridding
> oneself of the poison of society and going with the Tao - the
invisible
> flow of nature and mind that they consider the divine.
>
> And this is only for the religions. As far as secular ideologies are
> concerned, Communists regard perfection as being completely selfless
> and dedicated to the service of the cause of Communism, objectivists
> regard perfection as being completely self-motivated, logical (which
> they define as being based utterly in self-interest) and self-
> determining, and many in science community regard perfection as being
> completely rational and open-minded and dedicated to pursuit of
> knowledge. Other ideologies, from 18th century enlightenment onwards,
> all had their own idea of what makes a perfect human being.
>
> Now I ask you this question. With all these definitions of what makes
> a perfect person running around, how can anyone be perfect at all? Is
> it possible to be a perfect Taoist and a perfect Communist at the
> same time? How about a perfect Hindu and a perfect objectivist? What
we
> have, it seems to me, is a kaleidoscope of all the different colors
> through which we can see the light in different manifestations -
which
> all rearrange themselves with every change in available knowledge -
and
> whose flux creates a moving picture through which can be seen
> different aspects of the light - but in which no light can be gleamed
> whole.
>
> What is perfection? It is believed that people are imperfect; the
same
> idea however has not been applied to nature. I had seven perfect cats
-
> perfect because they were what nature intended for them to be:
clever,
> beautiful, sweet, loving creatures. The trees outside my window are
> perfect. The Sun is perfect. Why, then, not people?
>
> It is my belief that the reason for this is that we judge people's
> perfection in a different way than we judge that of nature. While
> plants and animals are made perfect by being fulfillment of their
> natural propensities, people are regarded as perfect if they subvert
> themselves to one or another social or moral code. While animals are
> made perfect by being who they are, people are supposedly made
perfect
> by striving to be something other than what they are: To be Jesus, to
> be Gandhi, to be Bill Gates, to be Abraham Lincoln, but never to be
> themselves.
>
> And that is the reason we get the silly notion all over the place
that
> people are imperfect - and the bad philosophies and social dynamics
> that stem from that notion.
>
> I ask you this. Is a cat made perfect by being the best cat it can
be,
> or is it made perfect by trying to be a dog? Is a Persian cat made
> perfect by being the best Persian cat it can be, or is it made
perfect
> by trying to be a Russian Blue or a British Shorthair?
>
> In the same way, the concept of most cultures of what constitutes
> human perfection is badly and horribly flawed. It is based on
changing
> one's nature in order to be something that one cannot be - that one
> can never be - while preventing one from being the best thing that
one
> can be.
>
> How can a human being be perfect? Emphatically not by trying to
> emulate anyone else - whether it be parents, relatives, business or
> political leaders, religious figures or anyone else. Rather, it is by
> being the best human being that he or she can be, given his or her
> natural propensities, talents, and potential. It is by being the most
> complete, most wise, most developed, most potent, most loving, most
> beautiful manifestation of what that person can be given their gifts
> and their possibilities. And it is this perfection - true perfection
as
> human being - perfection that is the most complete fruition of what
> exists inside as potential - that is the true human perfection -
> achievable human perfection - and human perfection that, in a free
> interaction with other similarly realized people, can create a
perfect
> culture, perfect society and perfect world.
>
> Ilya Shambat
"Perfection" is nothing more than a Platonic abstraction. Even if we
were "the best people we could be", whatever that means, we could never
measure up to that Platonic ideal - because it doesn't exist except in
our minds.
We live in a beautiful, chaotic, grubby world of perfect imperfection
and it will always be so, but still this impossible ideal haunts us.
Ilya, I still do not believe you have a grasp of Taoism (not that it
may be "perfectly" grasped.)
Cat
|
