How could God create imperfection?
Everything has a tendency to reach to an end. Perfection is the end. Therefore there is no motion in perfection.
How could God create imperfection?
How could God create imperfection?
Comments (79)
Meaningful?
Quoting tim wood
Sorry, I should have gave some examples: (1) A stone which is rolling down a hill. Tendency means that it is under a force to move in a given direction. The end is the bottom of hill, (2) A person who is looking to reach to a purpose or fulfill a feeling. Tendency is clear in this case clear. The end is the purpose or state of pleasure due to fulfilling a feeling. (3) The capacity that material turns into intellectual beings. Etc.
Quoting tim wood
Perfection is the end, no further or lower is allowed.
Quoting tim wood
The end is one instance of an end.
Quoting tim wood
There is a difference. You cannot go further than the end but you can go further than an end. Perfection is the end. The state of pleasure due to fulfilling a feeling is an end. There exist not an further point for the end but there exist another feeling to fulfill for example.
Quoting tim wood
Change in a stuff, matter for example.
Quoting tim wood
Everyone with a simple judgment who can experience change.
Quoting tim wood
That is a very good question? God's act should be perfect since He is perfect so He cannot create something less than God.
Quoting tim wood
The creator. The one who is perfect.
Quoting tim wood
I hope that thing is more clear now. I had no intention to look clever. These are questions which come to my mind and I would like to share them to others for solutions. Thanks for you patience. :)
The main questions are why something imperfect should be created or how something imperfect could be created? Is that what you want to ask?
Quoting Lone Wolf
Probably. You need a perfect artist to judge this situation.
No, I meant what I said. Imperfection is lack of perfection, hence it cannot be created.
Quoting bahman
Perfection must mean to be complete, as even you stated:
Quoting bahman
There cannot be room for improvements, as improvements would require effort, movement, to change. With the example of the artist, we can only view it with our imperfect human abilities; meaning our ability to detect complete perfection cannot be possible. So, if the sketch was complete, while no improvements could be made, as far as humanly possible, then it would be so to say "perfect". Now, if you or I came across this sketch with an eraser, and erased part of it, the sketch becomes imperfect. The artist did not erase this, and hence he or she did not create an imperfect sketch; you or I caused it to be imperfect, or incomplete, and now it needs improvements and changes.
Why? I cannot understand.
There is only creation, i.e. experiments with wave forms, that begin in humans when the baby first waves his/her hands and continues throughout life.
Perfection/imperfection is a game people play to amuse/pass their time alive.
Job 38-40
That is true. We cannot judge perfection by which I mean we cannot say that something is perfect or not. But the subject of this thread is not that whether we could not judge perfection or not.
Quoting tim wood
Reaching to state of perfection, if possible, is not equal to state of non-existence.
Quoting tim wood
No.
Quoting tim wood
I don't understand you here. I didn't say that God is imperfect.
Quoting tim wood
I think my argument sounds and I am not going to give up anything.
What is "God?" I mean... do we really have an answer to this? The creative force?
If "God" brought everything into being maybe the reason for creation was akin to "separating the wheat from the chaff?" So creation, in and of itself, is an evolutionary act.
One thing that seems apparent to me is that creation affords me the ability to see.
Otherwise you seem to have your question backwards. You cannot understand the universe by imposing a predefined view of god upon it; You have to understand god through your understanding of god's creation.
The argument goes; The universe is...... therefore the creator is .....
You are taking a view of god through the BOOK "of god"; but this is a human creation.
You need to open the book of nature to really see what is going on.
I don't doubt man had to write the biblical book of "God" but I think we need to question why the bible actually came into being.
Quoting charleton
This is a great point... but are you talking macro, micro or both? I think the term "biodynamics" became popular with Rudolf Steiner.
You have a choice. Either take the word of a bunch of half illiterate post neolithic goat herders and their myths, or look at the world as we know it. The book came about because people wrote down the myths of their culture. The Jewish culture is one amongst many. The books come down to us because of political power, and says nothing about anything I'm interested in.
Macro, micro both.
Biodynamics is a tiny part of nature. No idea why you want to take that route.
I really think this a naive view. The Bible is much to deep to be contrasted with goat herders and myth.
Biodynamics I think comes down to the interplay in life. It also has to do with social interaction and all it offers.
LOL!
How much of it have you even read?
I'm talking about the universe, not the activities of a few smart monkeys.
Well.. if you look at the first two chapters you'll see discussion on creation. What do you think of that?
So you reduce everything to the interaction of quarks and leptons? Modern thought is reductionism and I hope and believe will eventually broaden our scope. Ancient thought considered man as "the crown of creation" and that all functions of nature reside within man. In that sense it's believed man can directly interact with the universe. That is the true dimension of the term biodynamic.
To call that a discussion is an abuse of words. As for what I think of it; it is as misguided and shows as much ignorance as any number of other creation myths, and is about as accurate as turtles (going all the way down).
No - I'm talking about the universe. Not just a few particles, or your hopeless anthropomorphic reductionism. Man is the crown of his own imagination.
You are correct if you define evil as absence of good.
No, creative person.
Quoting Jon
Evolution is directed toward perfection, becoming Godly, which is logically impossible. So the act of creation is imperfect.
Quoting Jon
The main question is where we are heading?
It is about fruit of discussion, learning.
What is going on? Why we are here?
Yes.
It's not even a question.
I know that creation is not a question. You said that you need to open the book of nature to understand what is going on. I asked what is going on?
How do we come to be here might be a better one, and that can be answered by looking at natural history.
I think people are heading in different directions... to different places...
Imperfection isn't created; it is the corruption of something that was once perfect. In the case of the artist and the eraser, no new information was added, hence nothing imperfect was created. Rather, the painting became imperfect but was not created imperfect.
I don't know... I think creation brought everything into existence.
Yes, only God can create. But imperfection as I know it is a corruption of available information; nothing new is formed.
That doesn't mean imperfection wasn't present prior to creation.
[quote=Introduction to Kabbalah: The Creation Myth]Tzimtzum - Self-Limitation
Creating Space
In the creation myth of ancient Judaic mysticism, God creates the universe by a process dubbed tzimtzum, which in Hebrew means a sort of stepping back to allow for there to be an Other, an Else, as in something or someone else. [/quote]
Possibly.. but I don't think our minds can touch upon anything that isn't in this realm of creation. You're saying error is just misconfigured information but I think error is what we need to work out.
Actually I think I'm wrong in equating error with imperfection.
PS... when I say man I'm actually referring to all of life's attempt at survival.
What then is the purpose of creation?
Those who destroy the lie promote Ma'at;
those who promote the good will erase the evil.
As fullness casts out appetite,
as clothes cover the nude and as heaven clears up after a storm[/url].[/quote]
Maybe he made the perfect mistake?
Or maybe it is only humans that see them as imperfections.
Or made he did not create anything at all and the imperfections came about just as the perfections did.
It would be better if you can give some examples of imperfections which is created (by God)
What is to do "good"? Is it applicable to life of all animals?
Give some random example:
Is Trump doing good or bad?
Is Kim doing good or bad?
Imperfection in its own word implies a lack of perfection, hence IMperfection. Suppose that things were at one time created to last an infinite amount of time, it would be then perfect. But as a fault, or imperfection came about, the loss of complete order forces it to become finite.
The painting does not require you for its existence. And the person who erased it would be detracting from its existence.
So why don't you give some examples of doing good
May be God's perfection isn't human perfection.
That is logically impossible since an imperfect being/thing doesn't change.
I am arguing against an imperfect act which cannot be performed by a perfect being since perfection is the end.
The whole is sum of its parts and each parts is imperfect therefore the whole is imperfect. In fact we can grasp the whole. The whole also is subject to change therefore it is not perfect.
The question is about ability. Does God have power to create imperfect thing? Is it logically possible.
Quoting Sir2u
Things are imperfect since they are subject to motion. Motion is not an illusion.
Quoting Sir2u
Maybe.
Things were in motion after creation and they still are in motion. Therefore things have been not perfect.
If motion is imperfection, perfect does not exist at all and probably is beyond imagination.
If God is an intelligent being and creator of everything, why should He do so?
If He has created out of pleasure, then He is too irresponsible to break the perfect symmetry
If He has created out of kindness/ pity, then question is for whom was this kindness (there was nothing before in perfect condition), the unnecessary kindness is akin to ridicule/ mockery to His own creation
If He has created out of no reason, then He is an Idiot
In all these cases it goes against the concept of God as the creator of everything. If God is without a form/ body, it itself cannot initiate any creativity. If God is ultimate intelligent being, there must be someone more intelligent who created God. That's an infinite loop. I would prefer to keep it simple and imagine that the motion/ imperfection always existed.
PS: These are philosophical thoughts of early Indian Philosophers during 7th century BC (Buddhism, Jainism, some factions of Mimamsa etc.)
You are right with your observation. But the question is about ability to create imperfection. Perfection is the end.
Quoting Santanu
That is logically impossible too. The argument for this is as following: You cannot reach from infinite past to now with waiting. Therefore there is a beginning.
Quoting Santanu
Interesting.
For this there is the "Big Bang Theory". Armand Delsemme in "Our cosmic origin" imagined a possible way of start at Big Bang. It too comes with its own baggage of problems though.
Yes, we simply don't know.
To me, this question itself is not that important to know, if at all knowable. We can move on with a theory whichever fits best to most circumstances. If somehow later, we come to know a perfect reason, it will be a bonus.
That we exist, and irrespective of how we are created, more important question will be what should we do next. Is there a objective answer?
Of course he can, he created the perfect mistake. We are the ones that see it as imperfection.
So perfection is not the end and you need to say what is wrong with my argument.
Can you study the substance of darkness or cold? Of course not, as there is nothing to study other than the limited amount of light or cold.
Quoting Mr Phil O'Sophy
If it was created perfectly, then it would remain perfect until something blemished it. It is perfectly possible to have something not decay if no change was brought about. Something cannot come from nothing, so completeness must be brought by something. Nothing, in and of itself, is essentially perfect nothing, so perfection was still there, but in the manner of nothing. Once the creation of a substance is formed, then that becomes a perfect something. If one comes and erases part of that something, and detracts from its completeness, then it becomes imperfect. Essentially, it must be that whatever substance is brought about (or lack thereof) must be fully complete. Perfect nothing must not contain any sort of substance, and perfect something must be completely formed and not have any aspect of fault.
Quoting Mr Phil O'Sophy
Of the supposition that perfection cannot be faulted, there does not seem to be ample evidence, as I have demonstrated how it could come about. I have described perfect as the completion of the substance, with no fault.
The end of what?
Quoting bahman
I doubt that there is anything wrong with your argument.
This is supposing that perfection must require ALL things, which clearly is not the case. It merely requires the completion of the substance, which generally requires integrated structure in an orderly form and to be perfectly functional, that is to say, complete.
Essentially, it could become perfect again upon its completion or re-completion.
Hey, wait a minute there. I am imperfect, does that mean that I have no chance of changing.
Man, I am so screwed.
The end at which you reach to perfection, if this practically possible.
Quoting Sir2u
If my argument is correct then God cannot create imperfection.
If creation could become perfect then we have new Gods. So what is the purpose of not creating Gods in the first place.
If you become perfect then it you could not make a irrational act and create imperfect creation. That is against divine justice. It is logically impossible. The same is true if Perfection, God, is the first place.