Why would gods use cultural diffusion?

Koldo · Aug 17, 2021

dybmh said:
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I gave 3 examples where perfect isn't better.

The logical chain failed for me at #1. Without it, the conclusion is not valid.

The #1 is a definition. If perfect is not, by definition, better than imperfect, then what is the distinction between perfect and imperfect?

On a side note, you should learn the meaning of 'valid'. It doesn't mean what you think it does.

firedragon · Aug 17, 2021

WonderingWorrier said:
Their different interpretations of holy texts has made them lame. They are unequal. They are not straight.

When My servants ask thee concerning Me, I am indeed close (to them): I listen to the prayer of every suppliant when he calleth on Me: Let them also, with a will, Listen to My call, and believe in Me: That they may walk in the right way. Quran 2:186

Whose ways are crooked, and they froward in their paths: Proverbs 2:15

Yet the children of thy people say, The way of the Lord is not equal: but as for them, their way is not equal. Ezekiel 33:17

Jesus healed the lame. He put them straight.

O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). Quran 49:13

That is not Lame means WW. Lame in the Tanakh is when someone loses a foot, limps, born without a foot, injured or some defect like that. Its howlos or kholos.

You are equating with some Quran verses which is Rashadha, which means the correct manner, the more straight path, one with more sound judgment etc.

They are both polls apart.

WonderingWorrier · Aug 17, 2021

firedragon said:
That is not Lame means WW. Lame in the Tanakh is when someone loses a foot, limps, born without a foot, injured or some defect like that. Its howlos or kholos.

You are equating with some Quran verses which is Rashadha, which means the correct manner, the more straight path, one with more sound judgment etc.

They are both polls apart.

Like I said. Unequal. Not straight.

They hear but they don't understand. They see but they can't perceive.

Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: Acts 28:26

And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness. Isaiah 29:18

Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see. Isaiah 42:18

Jesus healed the blind man:

And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees, walking. Mark 8:24

For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands. Isaiah 55:12

I think people cant perceive the walking and talking trees.

Do you know what the "trees" mean?

dybmh · Aug 17, 2021

Koldo said:
The #1 is a definition. If perfect is not, by definition, better than imperfect, then what is the distinction between perfect and imperfect?

Asked and answered already. I gave you a list of qualities of an imperfect birthday card vs. a perfect birthday card.

As I said, ask any parent who received a messy crayola brithday card from their child whether or not a perfect card would have been better.

dybmh · Aug 17, 2021

Koldo said:
On a side note, you should learn the meaning of 'valid'. It doesn't mean what you think it does.

One of your premises was false; it was lacking a basis in fact. Therefore your conclusion was not valid.

dybmh · Aug 17, 2021

@Koldo, It's easy to see that improvement is better than perfection.

hyperlink: Psychology Today: Is Perfection even desirable?

Also from Perfection - Wikipedia

"
the greatest perfection is imperfection. This was formulated by Lucilio Vanini (1585–1619), who had a precursor in the 16th-century writer Joseph Juste Scaliger, and they in turn referred to the ancient philosopher Empedocles. Their argument, as given by the first two, was that if the world were perfect, it could not improve and so would lack "true perfection," which depends on progress. To Aristotle, "perfect" meant "complete" ("nothing to add or subtract"). To Empedocles, according to Vanini, perfection depends on incompleteness ("perfectio propter imperfectionem"), since the latter possesses a potential for development and for complementing with new characteristics ("perfectio complementii"). This view relates to the baroque esthetic of Vanini and Marin Mersenne: the perfection of an art work consists in its forcing the recipient to be active—to complement the art work by an effort of mind and imagination.[6]

The paradox of perfection—that imperfection is perfect—applies not only to human affairs, but to technology. Thus, irregularity in semiconductor crystals (an imperfection, in the form of contaminants) is requisite for the production of semiconductors. The solution to the apparent paradox lies in a distinction between two concepts of "perfection": that of regularity, and that of utility. Imperfection is perfect in technology, in the sense that irregularity is useful.[7]

------------------------------------------------------------

Because of this ^^ it's certainly reasonable for someone to value imperfection and/or to value improvement over perfection.

PearlSeeker · Aug 18, 2021

Koldo said:
How did you reach this conclusion?

Everything perfect means no potentiality.
No potentiality --> no movement, change, progress, growth ...

PearlSeeker · Aug 18, 2021

BrightShadow said:
Those who believe in God also believe that God programmed all animals with basic knowledge of survival, taking care of their new born etc. Birds know how to build their nest etc. Bees know how to build their hives etc.. Who taught them? If God did then God could have also easily implanted certain knowledge (in question) straight into our brain if he wished.

There are also atheists (for example Thomas Nagel) who advocate teleology - a theory about nature's built-in ends/purposes.

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

dybmh said:
One of your premises was false; it was lacking a basis in fact. Therefore your conclusion was not valid.

View attachment 53991

Let me show you the way,:

"In logic, specifically in deductive reasoning, an argument is valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false.[1] It is not required for a valid argument to have premises that are actually true,[2] but to have premises that, if they were true, would guarantee the truth of the argument's conclusion."

Validity (logic) - Wikipedia

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

dybmh said:
Asked and answered already. I gave you a list of qualities of an imperfect birthday card vs. a perfect birthday card.

As I said, ask any parent who received a messy crayola brithday card from their child whether or not a perfect card would have been better.

I am asking you what is the distinction about what is perfect and what is imperfect in general. How would you define the distinction between perfect and imperfect? If you disagree with the definition in #1, what definition would you use?

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

dybmh said:
@Koldo, It's easy to see that improvement is better than perfection.

hyperlink: Psychology Today: Is Perfection even desirable?

Also from Perfection - Wikipedia

"
the greatest perfection is imperfection. This was formulated by Lucilio Vanini (1585–1619), who had a precursor in the 16th-century writer Joseph Juste Scaliger, and they in turn referred to the ancient philosopher Empedocles. Their argument, as given by the first two, was that if the world were perfect, it could not improve and so would lack "true perfection," which depends on progress. To Aristotle, "perfect" meant "complete" ("nothing to add or subtract"). To Empedocles, according to Vanini, perfection depends on incompleteness ("perfectio propter imperfectionem"), since the latter possesses a potential for development and for complementing with new characteristics ("perfectio complementii"). This view relates to the baroque esthetic of Vanini and Marin Mersenne: the perfection of an art work consists in its forcing the recipient to be active—to complement the art work by an effort of mind and imagination.[6]

The paradox of perfection—that imperfection is perfect—applies not only to human affairs, but to technology. Thus, irregularity in semiconductor crystals (an imperfection, in the form of contaminants) is requisite for the production of semiconductors. The solution to the apparent paradox lies in a distinction between two concepts of "perfection": that of regularity, and that of utility. Imperfection is perfect in technology, in the sense that irregularity is useful.[7]

------------------------------------------------------------

Because of this ^^ it's certainly reasonable for someone to value imperfection and/or to value improvement over perfection.

It is a matter of mislabeling as I have stated.
When someone says imperfection is perfect they are using terms that contradict each other. It is like saying a circle is a square.

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

PearlSeeker said:
Everything perfect means no potentiality.
No potentiality --> no movement, change, progress, growth ...

Once again, how did you reach this conclusion?

PearlSeeker · Aug 18, 2021

Koldo said:
Once again, how did you reach this conclusion?

Reasoning.

dybmh · Aug 18, 2021

Koldo said:
I am asking you what is the distinction about what is perfect and what is imperfect in general. How would you define the distinction between perfect and imperfect? If you disagree with the definition in #1, what definition would you use?

Complete

Koldo said:
It is a matter of mislabeling as I have stated.
When someone says imperfection is perfect they are using terms that contradict each other. It is like saying a circle is a square.

The paradox is descrbed in the wikipedia article. The defintion you're using is incomplete if it doesn't acknowledge the outliers where perfection is not ideal.

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

PearlSeeker said:
Reasoning.

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

dybmh said:
Complete

The paradox is descrbed in the wikipedia article. The defintion you're using is incomplete if it doesn't acknowledge the outliers where perfection is not ideal.

What is incomplete about a birthday card, written by a young child, with spelling errors?

How do you figure whether something is complete or incomplete?

dybmh · Aug 18, 2021

Koldo said:
What is incomplete about a birthday card, written by a young child, with spelling errors?

Previously you asked for a description of a perfect birthday card. I replied in post#88.

Koldo said:
How do you figure whether something is complete or incomplete?

By either comparing it to an imagined concept of the perfect card, or comparing it to the other cards rec'd.

dybmh · Aug 18, 2021

@Koldo, have you ever heard the expression: "It's the thought that counts"?

Anytime this expression is appropriate, perfection is not superlative.

Further if you compare the situations where perfection is not ideal, it's in relationships between parent/child or teacher/student. If perfection is not the ideal in these relationships, how much more so between an infinite-ominpotent being and its flawed, finite, creation?

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

dybmh said:
Previously you asked for a description of a perfect birthday card. I replied in post#88.

By either comparing it to an imagined concept of the perfect card, or comparing it to the other cards rec'd.

You are merely using the word complete and incomplete as equal to perfect and imperfect, but you are not saying in what way those first two words actually explain the latter two. That's what a definition should do.

Koldo · Aug 18, 2021

dybmh said:
@Koldo, have you ever heard the expression: "It's the thought that counts"?

Anytime this expression is appropriate, perfection is not superlative.

Further if you compare the situations where perfection is not ideal, it's in relationships between parent/child or teacher/student. If perfection is not the ideal in these relationships, how much more so between an infinite-ominpotent being and its flawed, finite, creation?

As I have said: It is not that perfection is not ideal, it is that what you are calling perfection is not perfection.

Why would gods use cultural diffusion?

Outstanding Member

Veteran Member

Active Member

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Outstanding Member

Outstanding Member

Outstanding Member

Outstanding Member

Well-Known Member

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש

Outstanding Member

Outstanding Member

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש

Outstanding Member

Outstanding Member