RE: Musings about omnipotence and perfection.
February 17, 2011 at 8:33 am
(This post was last modified: February 17, 2011 at 9:43 am by Edwardo Piet.)
If something is without flaws then it really is perfect if perfect is to mean "flawless". The question is then in two parts "What constitutes a flaw?" and "Can I recognize any flaws in thing X?". If you can't recognize any flaws in X but there are still flaws to recognize in X, X still has flaws, you've just failed to recognize them.
However, if there are no flaws in a thing simply because you have failed to define anything as a "flaw" I doubt that that's worthy of being called "perfect" simply because you haven't bothered to define any possible flaws at all.
So I think it is rather like justice and injustice. Injustice can't work without the concept of justice. Imperfection can't really work without the concept of perfection. When you say someone doesn't deserve something you are not stating indifference on the matter of justice. Where is the midway between "You do deserve" and "You don't deserve"? Where is the midway between "That's perfect/flawless" or "You are imperfect/that's flawed", etc.
However, if there are no flaws in a thing simply because you have failed to define anything as a "flaw" I doubt that that's worthy of being called "perfect" simply because you haven't bothered to define any possible flaws at all.
So I think it is rather like justice and injustice. Injustice can't work without the concept of justice. Imperfection can't really work without the concept of perfection. When you say someone doesn't deserve something you are not stating indifference on the matter of justice. Where is the midway between "You do deserve" and "You don't deserve"? Where is the midway between "That's perfect/flawless" or "You are imperfect/that's flawed", etc.
