Is this a perfect world?

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Here's the problem with perfection: even if it could exist, it's too boring. Life is about living. It's adversity that makes life, life. Perfection is the ideal state of freedom from struggle or harm, an existence in accordance with whatever natural harmony seems best to the imagination. This existence lacks any sort of hook that might keep people invested in it.

Apart from the enjoyment of life and its' pleasures. This whole "struggle must exist in order for life to be worth something/enjoyable" traces its' roots to capitalism through protestantic christian values and is, at its' base, an attempt to keep people reaching for more in order for society to maintain inherently unstable economical models or belief systems (Martin Luther himself argued that idle hands are what causes religious doubt, which is why he emphasized the importance of work to please God). One might for example consider some eastern philosophies (such as Confucianism and Zen Buddhism) that considers the absence of struggle, want or need to be ideal. There's a reason why Zen and Confucian monks are repeatedly referred to as the most content and happy people alive, because they don't struggle and in not doing so they can find the inner peace that most of us find so elusive.

On a more semantic level, a perfect life that gets boring is not perfect, is it? The very idea of perfection requires that it is a life that can in no way, shape or form be improved and is so good that there's no reason to not live it or want to change into another way of life. So saying a perfect life would be boring is a paradox.

 

[Vladeon]

Nothing is perfect yet everything is perfect. Perfection is an ideal that only exists in metaphysics. However, everything that exists does so in a perfect condition of itself. Every chair is a perfect representation of itself, every person is a perfect representation of themselves, and likewise the world is a perfect representation of itself. But nothing can be perfect.

Think on that a bit because both statements are completely true.

 

[Silvanus]

"If one dismisses the rest of all possible worlds/ One finds that this is the best of all possible worlds"!


Seriously, though, the world is far from perfect even if we discount the human contribution. The earth would still be a planet wracked by natural disasters, made up of tectonic plates that don't sit easily together (and cause earthquakes with the friction between them). The pull of our moon causes tidal waves and flooding; the need for the earth's core to vent and cool causes volcanic eruptions.

There is enough food to feed humanity, that's true; humanity managed to mess that up itself. But the planet itself is full of monumental flaws too. It's the only one we have, though, and it's miles better than the alternatives.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

I?m thinking how far an individual stands on ?God? might play at least a slight part as to whether or not they believe there can ever be a ?perfect world?, on Earth or elsewhere.

Since the concepts of ?good? and ?evil? are highly subjective, talking about them in a philosophical discussion relating to the positive or negative effects of whether or not war, murder, death, rape, thieving, prejudice, disease, the entire spectrum of human weaknesses?is ultimately and effectively meaningless.

Even the idea of a ?perfect world? (not ?perfection? itself, as, depending on which definition you take after, there can be perfect things, like a ?perfect circle? or a ?perfect answer? or ?perfect? simply meaning ?complete?) is subjective, not to mention unattainable in many people?s worlds. Our world is like a complicated spider web, as you put it, and nigh every action that we make has a subtle ripple effect that eventually widens as time goes on.

I?m not saying we should accept injustice. But wishing for ?peace on Earth? is just an idealistically simplistic request that will never bear fruit, because ?peace? doesn?t necessarily mean ?absence of war? when there?ll still be someone suffering on the streets no matter what you do. I mean, there are even some people who appear to have a ?perfect? life, but for some inexplicable reason that even they can?t explain, they feel depressed. The only thing we can do is try and make the world better, not perfect, as that?s at least attainable. But even if not, as long as you know that you?re a good person and that you?re overall content with your life, maybe ? just maybe ? that?s enough.

Personally, my ?perfect? life would be if I was a domestic cat. I just wouldn?t have the intellectual capacity to give a shit about anything but sleeping and when my next meal was, and I wouldn?t feel stupid, because the majority of other cats would be in the same situation.

 

[Heronblade]

It is better than it has been in the past, it may or may not become better still in the future, and it could realistically become something that would make our present lives look like hell, even for those of us who live relatively privileged lives.

All in all, no, not even close, but I hope to use my time and mind to find someway to help humanity strive a little closer.

P.S. I'm rather surprised and disappointed in the people here whose idea of a paradise is essentially the life of a pampered pet. There's no purpose, no real reason to live at all. The only thing that would keep it from being a hell in the long run is lacking the mental capacity to think about it.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

As an atheist, the world is not perfect or imperfect.

As an atheist, i still can't figure out why you felt the need to make your belief part of your argument when it has nothing to do with it.

EDIT: Also, I love the amount of pretentious shit that makes no sense that is being said in this thread without attempt at explanation or justification.

Also i can't seem to figure out if you are being sarcastic or not here. Curse the internet.

Admittedly, I sort of hate it myself when someone brings what they are into a conversation that doesn't require it. But in this case my impression is that the notion of perfection is derived from God and the (supposed) fact that he created everything a certain way. The difference is that with God out of the picture that configuration is not divine or perfect but just what it is. Same with good and evil. Whether a belief in a higher power is present or not tends to also inform the belief in moral absolutes.

As to sarcasm, I sort of was and I wasn't.

 

[Poppy JR.]

"If one dismisses the rest of all possible worlds/ One finds that this is the best of all possible worlds"!


Seriously, though, the world is far from perfect even if we discount the human contribution. The earth would still be a planet wracked by natural disasters, made up of tectonic plates that don't sit easily together (and cause earthquakes with the friction between them). The pull of our moon causes tidal waves and flooding; the need for the earth's core to vent and cool causes volcanic eruptions.

There is enough food to feed humanity, that's true; humanity managed to mess that up itself. But the planet itself is full of monumental flaws too. It's the only one we have, though, and it's miles better than the alternatives.

Ninja'd my Candide reference. Well played. Well played.[footnote]The best of all possible plays[/footnote]

 

[Gauntlets28]

All is for the best in this best of all possible worlds!

 

[Auron225]

No, far from it. You do make good points though about how solutions to one problem create or worsen other problems and so the world cannot ever be perfect. I think one of the biggest problems though is overpopulation. Even with everything that is killing us, the worlds population continues to grow and if it keeps on growing then we will all pay for it later. For that we need space travel and to colonize other planets... why yes I have been playing Mass Effect recently, why do you ask?

That or we need to get a real handle on a stable population but for that world to be perfect, we'd also need everyone dying from old age and nothing else... which sounds next to impossible. I can definitely see space travel & colonizing happening first. Even then it'll be a far cry from perfect. By 'it' I of course mean not just Earth but also other places of human civilization.