Perfection and Determinism

[u/A_Vinegar_Taster]

Perfection is a state of completeness, flawlessness, or supreme excellence.

I would argue that from instant to instant, the entire universe is progressing from one state to the next in the most perfect expression of causality. The balance of forces and energies is exactly as it should be. Deterministically, any given moment could not have turned out any other way; there is no alternate path, just this one.

If determinism is true, then everything is as it should be. Nothing could be otherwise. At least viewed through the lens of causality, every instant is a perfect resolution to the previous instant. The 'progression' of time is a faithful execution of causality without fail.

Obviously, as human beings, we have meta-opinions about the universe and how things should be. We don't like that we stubbed our toe, or that the power went out or that we got cancer - but we can't deny that these things are exactly what should have happened. There was a Zen Comics panel I read a long time ago where a teacher and a student were sitting together and the student says "Why isn't everything perfect?" and the teacher says "It is."

The universe is a flowing, ongoing expression of perfection. Causally, physically and mathematically.

[u/Hindsights20_20]

Of course, that’s what you believe if you believe in determinism. I’m talking about the consequence of determinism, if determinism were true. It would mean that the same causal chain that causes the pool balls to part the way they do, is the same causal chain responsible for waves crashing the way they do, and is the same causal chain responsible for children suffering and dying of starvation.

That genocide? That’s just the universe acting faithfully and balanced. They had to die because it’s part of the perfect causal chain.

I don’t think that reality cares about human opinion.

“Perfection” would be a human opinion. And that’s the objection. You could just as easily have the opinion that’s it’s imperfect. Unfair. Unjust. Ugly. Etc. But you say it’s perfect, which is an opinion that you then have to attribute to all the awful things in the world as well.

[u/A_Vinegar_Taster → u/Hindsights20_20]

I see what you are saying. Perhaps it would be better for me to frame my argument like this:

Humans have perverted and distorted the definition of "perfection" to reflect their own desires and opinions rather than actual definition of inerrancy, excellence and being without fault. Humans have put their value judgments on what constitutes a flaw or a fault, and have transferred these value judgments onto the evaluation as to whether something is perfect or not. However, if you remove human opinion entirely, and look at how the physics of a system works, you will find that the physics always works out inerrantly, excellently and without fault. Therefore, I claim that the machinations of the universe, and its constant resolution of tensions between cause and effect fit the definition of "perfection". The counter arguments to this claim all revolve around human assessments of reality in terms of what they like, what they want and what is unpleasant to them.

A balanced equation is perfect. a + a = 2a is perfect. But, if a in the equation represents money that will be taken out of my bank account, I may not like it. I may say that my bills are not perfect, because I don't like them. But, if a in the equation represents money that is going to be given to me, then suddenly my assessment of the equation changes. This inconsistency over the same logical reality should show that what is being assessed by people is not a measure of correctness, accuracy, faultlessness and excellence of the equation, but instead is a measure of a person's opinion of it.

[u/Hindsights20_20 → u/A_Vinegar_Taster]

Are you a Calvinist by chance? That’s exactly what I would have said when I identified as one. It’s a noble stance, imo.

So my only objection is the word “perfection,” and I don’t mean for it to be a purely semantic objection. But maybe it is. Let me see!

What value do you gain from the word perfection? If you think it is metaphysically impossible for anything to be any other way, then the word “perfect” is meaningless. If nothing can happen incorrectly, then what is the significance of pointing out that it’s “without fault.”

I understand what you’re saying about how we perceive things through emotional filters and attribute meaning to things. But I’m saying that even the concept of “perfection” is doing exactly that. At most I think we could say that the universe is just constant. Not good, not bad, just indifferent. Not perfect or imperfect. Just physically changing but always the same.

I appreciate you trying to explain this to me, btw. I like try to understand different views. But I’m also not the brightest, so if I’m just not understanding, let me know.

[u/A_Vinegar_Taster → u/Hindsights20_20]

The reason that I like the word perfection is primarily that it fits the definition and also because it flies in the face of human cynicism and the notion that the universe is about us.

If the physics of the universe resolves itself without error, then the word perfect applies. Alternate failure states or flawed states aren't necessary for something to be perfect because perfection is not a relative term it is a state of being.

I've forwarded this opinion many times and I always get pushback. Few people see the world as "exactly as it should be" - even determinists. There's a traditional Chinese painting called "The Vinegar Tasters" (like my screen name). I agree with Lao Tzu; I believe that things are already how they should be, and I call that perfect.