The Perfect Form

[popeye1945]

There is no such thing as perfect form and/or function. All is plastic in its nature of change and is highly adapted at the moment, but that moment holds changes that the plastic world and its organisms must continue to change and adapt to. The perfect would not need change for the definition would need to apply to a perfect unchanging world.

[Age]

There is no such thing as perfect form and/or function.

WHY do you SPEAK IN ABSOLUTES, as though there are;

1. ABSOLUTES?

2. That you KNOW what the ABSOLUTES ARE, EXACTLY?

Oh, and by the way, there IS A 'perfect form', and 'It' IS IN and WITH A 'perfect function'.

All is plastic in its nature of change and is highly adapted at the moment, but that moment holds changes that the plastic world and its organisms must continue to change and adapt to.

Considering some things are NOT 'plastic' AS some things ARE 'wood' or 'steel' for example, WHY do you SAY and CLAIM, here, that ALL IS 'plastic'.

If you just want to REINFORCE that 'plasticity' is ALL there IS, as EVERY thing is ABLE TO and DOES 'change', then WHY NOT JUST TALK ABOUT and REINFORCE 'this idea', INSTEAD?

But, if this is NOT what you MEANT BY, your CLAIM, 'All is plastic', then what did you ACTUALLY MEAN? (Surely you do NOT REALLY BELIEVE that ALL, and/or EVERY thing, IS 'plastic', right?)

The perfect would not need change for the definition would need to apply to a perfect unchanging world.

ONCE AGAIN, the Universe is ALWAYS IN 'constant-change', HERE, NOW. So, ALTHOUGH 'the Universe, Itself, IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING the VERY Fact that the Universe IS IN A STATE OF 'constant change' IS PERFECT IN FORM, and, PERFECT IN FUNCTION, and AS SUCH, literally, does NOT NEED CHANGE, NOR NEED CHANGING.

[popeye1945]

There is no such thing as perfect form and/or function.

WHY do you SPEAK IN ABSOLUTES, as though there are;

1. ABSOLUTES?

2. That you KNOW what the ABSOLUTES ARE, EXACTLY?

Oh, and by the way, there IS A 'perfect form', and 'It' IS IN and WITH A 'perfect function'.

All is plastic in its nature of change and is highly adapted at the moment, but that moment holds changes that the plastic world and its organisms must continue to change and adapt to.

Considering some things are NOT 'plastic' AS some things ARE 'wood' or 'steel' for example, WHY do you SAY and CLAIM, here, that ALL IS 'plastic'.

If you just want to REINFORCE that 'plasticity' is ALL there IS, as EVERY thing is ABLE TO and DOES 'change', then WHY NOT JUST TALK ABOUT and REINFORCE 'this idea', INSTEAD?

But, if this is NOT what you MEANT BY, your CLAIM, 'All is plastic', then what did you ACTUALLY MEAN? (Surely you do NOT REALLY BELIEVE that ALL, and/or EVERY thing, IS 'plastic', right?)

The perfect would not need change for the definition would need to apply to a perfect unchanging world.

ONCE AGAIN, the Universe is ALWAYS IN 'constant-change', HERE, NOW. So, ALTHOUGH 'the Universe, Itself, IS CONSTANTLY CHANGING the VERY Fact that the Universe IS IN A STATE OF 'constant change' IS PERFECT IN FORM, and, PERFECT IN FUNCTION, and AS SUCH, literally, does NOT NEED CHANGE, NOR NEED CHANGING.

Plastic means alterable, changeable, and conformable. That which cannot be is in a sense absolute, perfection in an imperfect world in an imperfect cosmos does not exist. Give me an example of what you think would represent perfection.

[Phil8659]

An infinite number of forms would be the same as nothing and if it is a thing it has a form. Picture a square. The square is surrounded by and filled with squares infinitely. The spaces between the squares is also filled with infinite squares and so on and so forth infinitely. A blankness results and yet there is an infinite number of squares while there only being the same square under an infinite number of contexts relative to itself as each square provides the context through which the other squares occur. The square is its own context. The blankness, the nothingness, is the same as the form, the same as the square. This is as the Daoist's say "the great square has no corners" and as the Buddhist's say "form is emptiness and emptiness is form". The form is perfect in these regards as there is nothing to be added to or taken away from as nothing can be subtracted from or added to nothingness for if this where so there would be no nothingness.

What is this? ain't got nothing better to do than make up ways of adding subtracting multiply and dividing 0? Really? How long is it going to take you to work your way up to 1? Or did you get some bad acid?

You would have a real mental breakdown if you had to do an actual equation wouldn't you?

[popeye1945]

Biological form is never perfect in the sense of being complete, a plastic form is ideal because it is temporal and ever adapting to a larger context. Biological form is always adaptively chasing the ever-changing. There is never perfection, there is but process.

[Walker]

Biological form is never perfect in the sense of being complete, a plastic form is ideal because it is temporal and ever adapting to a larger context. Biological form is always adaptively chasing the ever-changing. There is never perfection, there is but process.

This is the reason for the well-known Age qualifier: At this time in the history of the world.
Perfection can be as brief as a rose bloom.
To explain how perfection that's uglier than a rose can be, we can say that each thing is perfect in and of itself.

[popeye1945]

Biological form is never perfect in the sense of being complete, a plastic form is ideal because it is temporal and ever adapting to a larger context. Biological form is always adaptively chasing the ever-changing. There is never perfection, there is but process.

This is the reason for the well-known Age qualifier: At this time in the history of the world.
Perfection can be as brief as a rose bloom.
To explain how perfection that's uglier than a rose can be, we can say that each thing is perfect in and of itself.

It is a romantic idea perfection, but has no place in reality. The beauty of a rose in its prime of health is said to be perfect in the sense of its beauty. I get the poetic connotation. Perfection is a time of near-perfection in form and function, indicating its distance from death or non-existence and/or loss of function. The aesthetic has a great deal to do with health, or in the case of an object, its function. Near-perfect for the person is an innate appreciation of health and fitness; the further away from the ideal, the closer the subject is to death. The ugliness of the monstrosity is on the edge of non-existence. Life is temporal, so too the beautiful or near perfection, for being is always a coming to be that never arrives but dissipates back into what it arose from, and the process goes on.

[Walker]

It is a romantic idea perfection, but has no place in reality.

Maybe.

"To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour …"
(And free perfection from delusion’s funhouse.)

[popeye1945]

It is a romantic idea perfection, but has no place in reality.

Maybe.

"To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour …"
(And free perfection from delusion’s funhouse.)

Poetic license, I believe what is being said is that one should be able to feel the rapture of being alive in a sacred world. The concept of perfection is the enthusiasm for a goal one can never reach. Perhaps there is an example of perfection, but that would have to be the constant of eternal change. The holy grail of the process of death and renewal, and the awe of wonder.

[Walker]

By that measure, perfection is merely a concept. A thought. A notion dependent upon the known. Something that exists only in the mind and in remembered snapshots, such as when Franz Klammer won the gold with that fearless feat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0VrDnlPhTI

[popeye1945]

By that measure, perfection is merely a concept. A thought. A notion dependent upon the known. Something that exists only in the mind and in remembered snapshots, such as when Franz Klammer won the gold with that fearless feat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0VrDnlPhTI

Yes, all knowledge is the subjective property of a conscious subject, and it never belongs to the object. That is all there is: ideas, concepts, and how one feels about them. Your apparent reality, your everyday reality, is entirely subjective, the only means of knowing anything. Just thought of a perfect form, Cameron Diaz --lol!! Subjectivity is such that we cannot escape it, and there is no way to prove that the reality we experience exists in the absence of biological consciousness.

[Alexiev]

It is a romantic idea perfection, but has no place in reality.

Maybe.

"To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour …"
(And free perfection from delusion’s funhouse.)

Here's the end of the Blake poem:

Every night and every morn
Some to misery are born.
Every morn and every night
Some are born to sweet delight.
Some are born to sweet delight,
Some are born to endless night.
We are led to believe a lie
When we see not thro' the eye
Which was born in a night to perish in a night,
When the Soul slept in beams of light.
God appears and God is light
To those poor souls who dwell in night,
But does a human form display
To those who dwell in realms of day.

And here's Tennyson on the subject:

Flower in the crannied wall,
I pluck you out of the crannies,
I hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower—but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, all in all,
I should know what God and man is.

(I like the rhyme of "man is" with "crannies".)

[popeye1945]

"Thou Art That." The Hindu Upanishads

[Eodnhoj7]

An infinite number of forms would be the same as nothing and if it is a thing it has a form. Picture a square. The square is surrounded by and filled with squares infinitely. The spaces between the squares is also filled with infinite squares and so on and so forth infinitely. A blankness results and yet there is an infinite number of squares while there only being the same square under an infinite number of contexts relative to itself as each square provides the context through which the other squares occur. The square is its own context. The blankness, the nothingness, is the same as the form, the same as the square. This is as the Daoist's say "the great square has no corners" and as the Buddhist's say "form is emptiness and emptiness is form". The form is perfect in these regards as there is nothing to be added to or taken away from as nothing can be subtracted from or added to nothingness for if this where so there would be no nothingness.

What is this? ain't got nothing better to do than make up ways of adding subtracting multiply and dividing 0? Really? How long is it going to take you to work your way up to 1? Or did you get some bad acid?

You would have a real mental breakdown if you had to do an actual equation wouldn't you?

You seem very upset and then project I am the one going through a breakdown.

[Eodnhoj7]

Biological form is never perfect in the sense of being complete, a plastic form is ideal because it is temporal and ever adapting to a larger context. Biological form is always adaptively chasing the ever-changing. There is never perfection, there is but process.

But if nothing is perfect then the process is not perfect and if the process is not perfect who can claim any depth of truth to it?